zebbern

scholarly-writing-refiner

"Polishes academic English paragraph by paragraph, reviewing grammar, word choice, voice, coherence, and sentence structure. Outputs revision suggestions alongside polished text. Triggered by phrases like 'polish this paragraph,' 'check the grammar,' 'rewrite in academic English,' or keywords like manuscript editing, SCI polishing, and journal submission editing."

zebbern 4,609 461 Updated 3mo ago

Resources

1
GitHub

Install

npx skillscat add zebbern/claude-code-guide/scholarly-writing-refiner

Install via the SkillsCat registry.

SKILL.md

Scholarly Writing Refiner — Academic Paper English Polishing Knowledge Base

Helps users review and polish English papers paragraph by paragraph according to international academic journal standards. Covers grammar correction, academic word choice optimization, voice normalization, coherence strengthening, sentence variety, and more. Outputs revision suggestions along with the polished text.

Quick Start

Users only need to provide:

  1. Text to polish: One or more paragraphs of English paper content
  2. Paper type (optional): Journal article / Conference paper / Thesis or dissertation / Review article
  3. Target journal/field (optional): e.g., Nature, IEEE, AAAI, Medicine, Computer Science, etc.
  4. Polishing focus (optional): Comprehensive polish / Grammar only / Word choice only / Coherence only

Example:

"Polish this Introduction for me. The target venue is NeurIPS, and I'd like the language to sound more natural with better logical flow."


1. Review Dimensions Overview

Polishing is carried out across 5 dimensions. Each dimension is rated independently with specific revision suggestions:

Dimension Label Review Focus
Grammar Grammar Subject-verb agreement, tense, articles, prepositions, clause structure, punctuation
Word Choice Word Choice Academic register, precision, collocation, avoidance of colloquialisms
Voice Voice & Tense Active/passive voice selection, tense consistency
Coherence Coherence & Cohesion Intra-paragraph and inter-paragraph transitions, argumentation chain, use of signaling words
Sentence Structure Sentence Structure Sentence variety, balance of long and short sentences, coordination and subordination

2. Grammar Review Rules

2.1 Common Grammar Errors Checklist

Error Type Incorrect Example Correction Explanation
Subject-verb disagreement The results of the experiment shows... The results of the experiment show... Subject is "results" (plural)
Missing/misused article We propose method to solve... We propose a method to solve... Singular countable nouns require an article
Dangling modifier Using the proposed method, the accuracy was improved. Using the proposed method, we improved the accuracy. The implied subject of a participial phrase must match the main clause subject
Run-on sentence The model performs well , it achieves 95% accuracy. The model performs well**;** it achieves 95% accuracy. / The model performs well**. It** achieves 95% accuracy. A comma cannot join two independent clauses
Incomplete comparison Our method is more efficient. Our method is more efficient than the baseline. Comparatives require an explicit object of comparison
Broken parallelism The system can detect, classify, and is able to segment... The system can detect, classify, and segment... Coordinated elements must share the same grammatical form
that/which confusion The model which we proposed... The model that we proposed... Restrictive relative clauses use "that"
Irregular plurals These phenomenon indicate... These phenomena indicate... Watch for irregular plural forms

2.2 Punctuation Rules

Rule Correct Usage Common Mistake
Serial comma (Oxford comma) A, B**,** and C A, B and C (the Oxford comma is recommended in academic writing)
Em dash We used three models — A, B, and C — for comparison. An em dash with spaces on both sides, or without spaces (depends on journal style)
Capitalization after colon Capitalize if a complete sentence follows: The result is clear: The model outperforms... Do not capitalize if a fragment follows
Quotation marks and periods American style: period inside quotes. British style: period outside quotes. Choose based on the target journal's regional convention
Abbreviation periods e.g., i.e., et al., etc. Note the comma: e.g., / i.e.,

2.3 Tense Guidelines by Paper Section

Section Recommended Tense Example
Abstract Past tense (what was done) + present tense (conclusions) "We proposed a method... The results show that..."
Introduction Present tense (current knowledge/consensus) + past tense (prior work) "Deep learning has become... Smith et al. demonstrated that..."
Methods Past tense (experimental procedures) "We trained the model on... The data were preprocessed..."
Results Past tense (experimental findings) "The model achieved 95% accuracy. Table 2 shows..."
Discussion Present tense (interpreting significance) + past tense (citing results) "This result suggests that... Our findings indicated that..."
Conclusion Past tense (summarizing work) + present tense (contributions/significance) "We proposed and evaluated... This work contributes to..."

3. Word Choice Optimization Rules

3.1 Colloquial → Academic Substitution Table

Colloquial Academic Alternative Context Notes
a lot of numerous / a substantial number of / considerable Choose based on what is being modified
get obtain / acquire / achieve / attain Choose based on collocation
show demonstrate / illustrate / indicate / reveal "demonstrate" emphasizes proof; "indicate" emphasizes suggestion
big / huge substantial / significant / considerable
thing factor / aspect / element / component
good effective / favorable / advantageous / robust
bad adverse / detrimental / suboptimal / inferior
use employ / utilize / leverage / adopt "utilize" is more formal than "use"; "leverage" emphasizes exploiting an advantage
about approximately / roughly / circa Use "approximately" for numerical descriptions
try attempt / endeavor
look at examine / investigate / analyze / explore
find out determine / ascertain / identify / discover
go up / go down increase / decrease / rise / decline
point out highlight / emphasize / underscore
deal with address / tackle / handle / mitigate
make sure ensure / verify / confirm
kind of / sort of somewhat / to some extent / partially
start / begin initiate / commence / undertake
end / finish conclude / terminate / complete
help facilitate / enable / assist / contribute to
need require / necessitate
can is capable of / is able to / has the potential to Avoid over-substitution — "can" is acceptable in academic writing

3.2 Vague → Precise Expression

Vague Expression Precise Alternative Notes
very good results statistically significant improvement / a 12% increase in accuracy Replace vague modifiers with concrete data
some researchers Several studies (Chen et al., 2023; Li et al., 2024) Replace vague references with specific citations
recently In the past five years / Since 2020 Provide a time range
a few three / a small number of (n=3) Specify the quantity
it is known that Prior work has established that (citation) Support with a citation
this is important This is critical for / This has significant implications for Explain why it matters

3.3 Reducing Redundancy

Redundant Expression Concise Version
in order to to
due to the fact that because / since
at the present time currently / now
it is worth noting that Notably, / Note that
it should be pointed out that (state the content directly)
a total of 50 samples 50 samples
the vast majority of most
in the event that if
has the ability to can
on a daily basis daily
in close proximity to near
take into consideration consider
is in agreement with agrees with
serves the function of functions as

4. Voice Guidelines

4.1 Active vs. Passive Voice Selection

Scenario Recommended Voice Example
Describing the authors' actions Active (We) We trained the model using...
Describing general methods/established facts Passive The data were collected from...
Emphasizing the object of an action Passive The samples were analyzed using mass spectrometry.
Reporting results Prefer active Our method achieves 95% accuracy.
Describing equipment/materials Passive The solution was heated to 100°C.

4.2 Common Voice Issues

Issue Incorrect Example Correction
Overuse of passive It was found by us that the results were improved by the method. We found that our method improved the results.
Inconsistent person The author proposes... We then evaluate... Use "We" or "The authors" consistently
Meaningless passive It can be seen that accuracy increases. Accuracy increases. / The results show that accuracy increases.

4.3 Academic Person Conventions

Person Use Case Notes
We Describing the authors' own work (most common) Many journals accept "We" even for single-author papers
The authors A more formal alternative Some journals prefer this usage
I Single-author theses and dissertations Some journals do not accept this
One Generic/hypothetical statements Somewhat old-fashioned; less common in modern academic writing

5. Coherence and Cohesion Rules

5.1 Intra-Paragraph Signaling Words

Logical Relationship Signal Words/Phrases Example
Addition Furthermore, Moreover, Additionally, In addition Furthermore, our method generalizes well to unseen data.
Contrast However, In contrast, Conversely, On the other hand, Nevertheless However, this approach suffers from high computational cost.
Cause & Effect Therefore, Consequently, As a result, Hence, Thus Therefore, we adopt a two-stage training strategy.
Exemplification For example, For instance, Specifically, In particular Specifically, we focus on the image classification task.
Emphasis Indeed, Notably, Importantly, It is worth noting that Notably, the improvement is consistent across all datasets.
Concession Although, Despite, Notwithstanding, While, Even though Although the model is simple, it achieves competitive results.
Summary In summary, To summarize, Overall, In conclusion Overall, the proposed method outperforms existing baselines.
Qualification Yet, Still, Nonetheless, That said That said, there are several limitations to our approach.
Sequence First, Second, Finally, Subsequently, Then First, we preprocess the data. Subsequently, we train the model.
Condition If, Provided that, Given that, Assuming that Given that the dataset is imbalanced, we apply oversampling.

5.2 Inter-Paragraph Transition Patterns

Pattern Description Example Opening Sentence
Hook The end of one paragraph leads into the next topic "This raises the question of how to efficiently scale the model."
Recap The next paragraph opens by revisiting the prior conclusion "Having established the effectiveness of our approach, we now turn to..."
Contrast Bridge Points out the shortcomings of the prior approach, introducing the current one "While these methods achieve reasonable accuracy, they fail to address..."
Question Bridge Uses a question to create a transition "How can we overcome this limitation? In this section, we propose..."
Topic Sentence The first sentence of each paragraph summarizes the core argument "The key advantage of our method is its ability to..."

5.3 Common Coherence Problems

Problem Description Fix Strategy
Jumping argumentation Leaping from A to C without the B step Add intermediate reasoning steps or transitional sentences
Signal word overuse Starting every sentence with However / Moreover Reduce signal words; use sentence structure to convey logic
Signal word misuse Using "Furthermore" to express contrast Use "However" for contrast; "Furthermore" for addition
Overly long paragraphs A single paragraph exceeding 8–10 sentences Split into 2–3 paragraphs by argument point
Overly short paragraphs A paragraph with only 1–2 sentences Merge into a related paragraph or expand the discussion
Unclear reference "This shows..." — what does "this" refer to? "This result shows..." / "This finding indicates..."

6. Sentence Structure Optimization Rules

6.1 Strategies for Sentence Variety

Strategy Original Improved
Participial phrase opening We use attention mechanism, and we improve accuracy. Leveraging the attention mechanism, we improve accuracy.
Inversion for emphasis The improvement is particularly notable in low-resource settings. Particularly notable is the improvement in low-resource settings.
Appositive insertion The model, which was proposed by Smith, achieves... The model, proposed by Smith (2023), achieves...
Nominalization We improved the model, and this led to... The improvement of the model led to...
Parallel structure The method is fast. It is also accurate. It is scalable too. The method is fast, accurate, and scalable.
Fronted adverbial Accuracy improved significantly when we added data augmentation. With data augmentation, accuracy improved significantly.

6.2 Sentence Structure Problems to Avoid

Problem Example Fix
Overly long sentences (>40 words) We trained the model on the dataset which was collected from ... and preprocessed using ... and then evaluated on ... Split into 2–3 shorter sentences
Consecutive short sentences The accuracy is high. The model is fast. It uses less memory. Combine: The model achieves high accuracy with fast inference and low memory consumption.
Starting with There is/are There are many studies that focus on... Many studies focus on...
Overuse of It is...that cleft sentences It is the attention mechanism that improves... The attention mechanism improves...
Noun pile-ups deep learning image classification model performance the performance of a deep learning model for image classification

7. Section-Specific Polishing Guide

7.1 Abstract

  • Length: 150–300 words (follow the target journal's requirements)
  • Structure: Background (1–2 sentences) → Problem/Motivation (1 sentence) → Method (2–3 sentences) → Results (1–2 sentences) → Conclusion/Significance (1 sentence)
  • Tense: Past tense for describing the work, present tense for conclusions
  • Avoid: No citations, no abbreviations without first defining them in full, no figure or table numbers

7.2 Introduction

  • Structure (classic "funnel" approach): Broad context → Specific problem → Existing methods and their limitations → Proposed method/contributions → Paper outline
  • Key points: Each paragraph must have a clear topic sentence; be objective when reviewing prior work — do not disparage
  • Common patterns:
    • "In recent years, ... has attracted increasing attention."
    • "Despite significant progress, ... remains a challenge."
    • "To address this issue, we propose..."
    • "The main contributions of this paper are as follows:"

7.3 Related Work

  • Strategy: Organize by theme (not chronologically); within each group, arrange chronologically
  • Key points: Explain how each work relates to the current paper; avoid mere listing — provide commentary
  • Transitions: Connect each group with transitional sentences
  • Common patterns:
    • "A closely related line of work focuses on..."
    • "In contrast to these approaches, our method..."
    • "Building upon the work of X, we extend..."

7.4 Methods

  • Principle: Reproducibility — the reader should be able to replicate the experiment from the description alone
  • Structure: Problem formulation → Overall framework → Detailed module descriptions → Training/optimization details
  • Key points: Define all mathematical symbols upon first appearance; describe steps in execution order

7.5 Results / Experiments

  • Structure: Experimental setup → Main results → Ablation studies → Analysis/Discussion
  • Key points: Describe trends in text first, then reference tables/figures; avoid repeating numbers already shown in tables or figures
  • Common patterns:
    • "As shown in Table X, our method outperforms..."
    • "We observe a consistent improvement of X% across..."
    • "The ablation study reveals that..."

7.6 Discussion

  • Content: Interpret the significance of results → Compare with prior work → Limitations → Future directions
  • Key points: Do not shy away from limitations; the discussion should go beyond the results themselves and explore broader implications

7.7 Conclusion

  • Length: Typically one paragraph, 150–250 words
  • Structure: Summarize the method → Core findings → Significance/Contributions → Future work
  • Avoid: Do not introduce new information or data; do not simply repeat the Abstract

8. Polishing Output Format

For each paragraph of text provided by the user, output in the following format:

### Original
[User's original text]

### Review

| Dimension | Rating | Key Issues |
|-----------|--------|-----------|
| Grammar | ✓ Good / △ Needs improvement / ✗ Significant issues | Brief description |
| Word Choice | ✓ / △ / ✗ | Brief description |
| Voice | ✓ / △ / ✗ | Brief description |
| Coherence | ✓ / △ / ✗ | Brief description |
| Sentence Structure | ✓ / △ / ✗ | Brief description |

### Detailed Changes
1. **Original**: "..."
   **Revised**: "..."
   **Reason**: [Specific rationale citing the rules above]

2. ...

### Polished Version
[Complete polished paragraph]

9. Domain-Specific Notes

Different disciplines have their own writing conventions. Respect field-specific norms when polishing:

Field Characteristics Notes
Computer Science Active voice ("We") is common More colloquial phrasing is tolerated (e.g., "we run"); algorithm descriptions must be precise
Medicine/Biology Passive voice predominates "Patients were randomized..."; terminology must conform to MeSH standards
Physics Concise, equation-driven Mathematical derivations must be rigorous; "one can show that..." is common
Social Sciences Frequent use of hedging "may," "might," "suggests"; avoid overly absolute statements
Engineering Results-oriented Emphasis on performance metrics and experimental validation

10. Agent Behavior Guide

When the user submits text for polishing, follow this workflow:

  1. Confirm details: Paper type, target journal/conference (if any), polishing focus
  2. Identify the section: Determine which part of the paper the text belongs to and apply the corresponding section guidelines
  3. Five-dimension review: Check systematically: Grammar → Word Choice → Voice → Coherence → Sentence Structure
  4. Annotate sentence by sentence: Provide a reason for every change, citing the specific rule
  5. Output the polished version: Deliver the complete polished text
  6. Summarize recommendations: Highlight the main categories of issues and directions for improvement

Core Principles:

  • Preserve the author's original meaning and argumentation logic; do not alter technical content
  • Minimize changes — if a single word can be changed instead of a whole sentence, change only the word; if a sentence can be changed instead of a whole paragraph, change only the sentence
  • When uncertain whether something is an error, present it as a suggestion rather than making the change outright
  • Defer to the author's terminology unless it is clearly incorrect
  • Do not modify content the user has marked as "please keep"