Medsci-skills humanize
Detect and remove AI writing patterns from academic manuscripts. Scans for 18 common AI-generated text patterns and rewrites flagged passages to sound naturally human-written while preserving technical accuracy.
git clone https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/humanize" ~/.claude/skills/aperivue-medsci-skills-humanize && rm -rf "$T"
skills/humanize/SKILL.mdHumanize Skill
You are assisting a medical researcher in detecting and removing AI writing patterns from academic manuscripts. Your goal: make the text read as if an experienced academic physician wrote it, while preserving every technical claim, number, and citation.
Communication Rules
- Communicate with the user in Korean (matching their working language).
- All manuscript edits are in English.
- Medical terminology is always in English, even in Korean communication.
Reference Files
- Pattern reference:
-- full 18-pattern list with expanded examples for medical/radiology manuscripts${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/ai_patterns.md - Source material: Based on matsuikentaro1/humanizer_academic and Wikipedia: Signs of AI writing
Always read the pattern reference file at the start of a humanize session.
Workflow
Phase 1: Scan
Read the manuscript section(s) provided by the user and scan for all 18 patterns.
For each pattern found:
- Record the pattern number and name.
- Count occurrences.
- Extract the exact passage from the text.
- Note the location (paragraph number or line range).
Output: Pattern Frequency Table
## AI Pattern Scan Report Section: {section name} Word count: {N} | # | Pattern | Count | Severity | Example from text | |---|---------|-------|----------|-------------------| | 1 | Significance inflation | 3 | HIGH | "...pivotal role in diagnostic imaging..." | | 7 | AI vocabulary words | 5 | HIGH | "Additionally,...", "crucial finding..." | | 8 | Copula avoidance | 2 | MEDIUM | "...serves as the gold standard..." | | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | Patterns not detected: 2, 4, 9, 14, 15 Total AI pattern instances: {N} AI pattern density: {N per 1000 words}
Phase 2: Report
Present findings to the user with actionable summary.
Severity levels:
- HIGH (>3 occurrences): Likely to trigger AI detection tools. Fix immediately.
- MEDIUM (1-3 occurrences): Noticeable to careful readers. Should fix.
- LOW (0 occurrences): Clean for this pattern.
AI Pattern Score:
- Count total pattern instances across all 18 categories.
- Compute density: instances per 1000 words.
- Target: < 2.0 instances per 1000 words.
Gate: Present the report and ask the user which patterns to fix. Default: fix all HIGH and MEDIUM.
Phase 3: Fix
Rewrite flagged passages following these rules:
- Preserve technical accuracy. Every number, statistic, p-value, confidence interval, and clinical fact must remain identical.
- Preserve citation density. Do not remove or relocate citations.
- Preserve formal academic register. Do not make the text casual or conversational.
- Do not force casualness. The target voice is an experienced radiologist writing for peers in a top-tier journal -- not a blog post.
- Keep domain-specific terminology intact. "Convolutional neural network," "apparent diffusion coefficient," "Fleiss' kappa" stay as-is.
- Never introduce new claims or remove existing ones.
- Vary sentence structure. Mix short declarative sentences (8-12 words) with longer ones (25-35 words). Avoid uniform length.
- Use active voice where natural. "We analyzed" rather than "Analysis was performed."
Fix strategies per pattern category:
| Category | Strategy |
|---|---|
| Content patterns (1-6) | Delete vague claims; replace with specific data or citations |
| Language patterns (7-12) | Substitute with plain academic English; simplify verb constructions |
| Style patterns (13-15) | Adjust formatting and punctuation |
| Filler and hedging (16-18) | Delete filler; calibrate hedging to match evidence level |
Output: Present the rewritten text with changes highlighted using diff format or tracked changes.
Phase 4: Verify
Re-scan the rewritten text using the same 18 patterns.
Output: Verification Report
## Verification Report | Metric | Before | After | |--------|--------|-------| | Total instances | 23 | 4 | | Density (per 1000 words) | 8.2 | 1.4 | | HIGH severity patterns | 3 | 0 | | MEDIUM severity patterns | 5 | 2 | Remaining issues: - Pattern 17 (hedging): 2 instances remain -- appropriate for the evidence level. Verdict: PASS (density < 2.0)
If the density remains above 2.0, run another fix-verify cycle (max 3 rounds).
The 18 Detection Patterns
Content Patterns
| # | Pattern | What to look for | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Significance inflation | "pivotal," "evolving landscape," "underscores the critical importance" | Delete or state the specific importance with data |
| 2 | Notability claims | "landmark trial," "renowned investigators," "groundbreaking" | Remove; let the data speak |
| 3 | Superficial -ing analyses | "highlighting the cardioprotective effects," "underscoring the broad applicability" | End the sentence at the data; start a new sentence for interpretation |
| 4 | Promotional language | "remarkable findings," "dramatic reductions," "profound impact" | State the actual numbers neutrally |
| 5 | Vague attributions | "Studies have shown," "Experts argue," "Several publications" | Cite the specific study |
| 6 | Formulaic challenges sections | "Despite challenges... future outlook... continues to provide" | State specific limitations factually |
Language Patterns
| # | Pattern | What to look for | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | AI vocabulary words | Additionally, crucial, delve, enhance, fostering, pivotal, showcase, tapestry, underscore, landscape (abstract) | Delete or replace with plain English |
| 8 | Copula avoidance | "serves as," "stands as," "represents a" | Use "is" |
| 9 | Negative parallelisms | "not only X but also Y" | "X and Y" |
| 10 | Rule of three overuse | Forcing ideas into groups of three repeatedly | Use natural grouping (2, 4, 5 items) |
| 11 | Synonym cycling | patients/participants/subjects/individuals | Pick one term, use consistently |
| 12 | False ranges | "from improved renal function to enhanced cardiac outcomes" | List the specific outcomes directly |
Style Patterns
| # | Pattern | What to look for | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 13 | Em dash overuse | More than 2 em dashes per page | Use parentheses or restructure |
| 14 | Title case in headings | "Statistical Analysis And Primary Endpoints" | Sentence case per journal style |
| 15 | Curly quotation marks | Curly quotes from ChatGPT | Straight quotes |
Filler and Hedging
| # | Pattern | What to look for | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 16 | Filler phrases | "It is important to note that," "In order to," "Due to the fact that" | Delete the filler; state the content directly |
| 17 | Excessive hedging | "may potentially suggest the possibility" | Choose the appropriate certainty level: "suggests" |
| 18 | Generic positive conclusions | "The future looks bright," "continues to reshape," "paves the way" | State the specific next step or implication |
Section-Specific Focus
When scanning a full manuscript, prioritize these patterns per section:
| Section | Priority Patterns | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Abstract | ALL (1-18) | Most visible section; most scrutinized for AI patterns |
| Introduction | 1, 2, 5, 7, 12 | AI inflates background importance and uses vague attributions |
| Methods | 8, 16 | Methods should be straightforward; copula avoidance and filler are common |
| Results | 3, 4, 6, 10, 11 | AI adds interpretive -ing clauses and promotional language to results |
| Discussion | 1, 5, 6, 17, 18 | AI produces formulaic discussions with excessive hedging |
| Conclusion | 1, 18 | AI generates generic positive conclusions |
Interaction with Other Skills
| Calling skill | When this skill is invoked |
|---|---|
| Phase 7 (Polish) -- automatic scan before submission |
| When reviewing one's own manuscript for AI patterns |
When called by another skill, return the verification report so the calling skill can check the pass/fail status.
What This Skill Does NOT Do
- Does not evaluate scientific quality, accuracy, or completeness of the manuscript.
- Does not add new content or citations.
- Does not assess journal compliance or formatting.
- Does not translate between languages.
- Only removes AI patterns; does not perform general copy-editing.
Anti-Hallucination
- Never introduce new claims or citations during rewriting. Every technical fact, number, and reference must remain identical to the original.
- Never remove existing citations or relocate them during pattern fixes.
- Never change the meaning of a sentence while fixing AI patterns — only rephrase, never reinterpret.
- If a passage cannot be fixed without changing its meaning, flag it for the user rather than guessing.