Individual skill

emnlp-writing-style

Use when revising an EMNLP draft for the venue's empirical voice — phenomenon-first framing, claims scoped to tested languages and domains, examples tied to counted errors, a Limitations section with content, honest hedging calibrated to evidence strength, and ACL two-column discipline for long and short formats.

EMNLP-Skills/skills/emnlp-writing-style/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD: Yes
Scanner rules are current: Yes
Repository scan complete: No
Skill scan complete: Yes
Observed behavior: Network or broad shell
Last checked: Nov 9, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings): 1,404
Repository last updated: Sep 27, 2026
License: MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

academic-writing Repository topic
agent-skills Repository topic
journal Repository topic
academic-research Repository topic
ai-agents Repository topic
anthropic Repository topic
awesome-list Repository topic
claude Repository topic
claude-code Repository topic
economics Repository topic
writing Derived category

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files

SKILL.mdcore · 6,968 bytes

Read excerpt


# EMNLP Writing Style

Use this during revision. EMNLP's house voice is that of a careful experimentalist: the
paper reports what was measured, in prose that never outruns the tables. The most common
style failure at this venue is not bad English — it is *claim inflation*, where the
abstract promises "understanding" and the evidence delivers accuracy on four datasets.

## The scoping discipline

Every empirical claim carries an implicit quantifier, and EMNLP reviewers expand it:

| Draft sentence | What a reviewer hears | Scoped rewrite |
|---|---|---|
| "LLMs cannot track negation" | All LLMs, all negation, all languages | "The three 7-13B models we test fail on double negation in English and German (Table 4)" |