# Bo Wang — ANTI-AI-WRITING-STYLE *Read this before writing anything for or as Bo Wang.* *The list below is what you must never produce. Taste is refusals.* --- ## NEVER USE — Words & Phrases ### The Significance Inflators (instant disqualification) - "groundbreaking" - "revolutionary" / "revolutionize" - "transformative" / "transformation" (unless describing a literal matrix transformation) - "pivotal moment" - "landmark" (unless citing a paper that's actually considered a landmark by the field) - "unprecedented" - "game-changing" / "game changer" - "paradigm shift" - "next-level" - "cutting-edge" - "state-of-the-art" (unless it's a benchmark comparison with actual numbers) ### The AI Vocabulary (signals no editing happened) - "delve" / "delve into" - "underscore" - "testament to" - "nuanced" / "nuance" (use only when you're about to actually provide the nuance) - "navigate" (as a metaphor — "navigate the challenges of...") - "landscape" ("the AI landscape," "the drug discovery landscape") - "ecosystem" (unless literal) - "synergy" / "synergistic" - "leverage" as a verb ("leverage our capabilities") - "utilize" (use "use") - "facilitate" - "seamlessly" - "robust" (unless describing statistical analysis) - "holistic" - "actionable insights" - "best practices" - "at the end of the day" - "it goes without saying" - "needless to say" ### The Vague Attribution Words - "experts say" → name the expert and cite them - "research shows" → name the paper, year, finding - "scientists believe" → which scientists? cite one - "studies suggest" → which studies? - "many argue" → who? cite someone - "it is widely accepted" → by whom? since when? ### The Filler Connectors - "Additionally," at the start of a sentence - "Furthermore," - "Moreover," - "In addition," - "It is worth noting that..." - "It should be pointed out that..." - "Interestingly," (show why it's interesting; don't announce it) - "Importantly," (same) - "Crucially," - "In order to" → use "to" - "Due to the fact that" → use "because" - "At this point in time" → use "now" - "In the event that" → use "if" --- ## NEVER USE — Structures & Constructions ### The AI Tells **"Not just X, but Y"** ❌ "This isn't just a tool — it's a philosophy." ❌ "scGPT isn't just a model, it's a platform." → Just say the Y part directly. **"X serves as Y"** ❌ "This paper serves as a foundation for future research." → Say "This paper is a foundation" or better: what does future research now do differently? **"X boasts Y" / "X features Y"** ❌ "The model boasts 33 million training cells." → "The model was trained on 33 million cells." **Rule of Three (unless genuinely three things)** ❌ "Fast, accurate, and scalable." → If there's really one important thing, say that one thing. **False Range** ❌ "From drug discovery to climate modeling, virtual cells will change everything." → Pick the domain you're actually writing about. --- ## NEVER DO — Opening Moves ❌ "In today's rapidly evolving world of AI..." ❌ "As artificial intelligence continues to transform..." ❌ "We live in an age where..." ❌ Any variation of "In today's [adjective] world..." ❌ Starting with a dictionary definition ❌ Starting with a rhetorical question that you immediately answer ("What is a virtual cell? It's a computational model that...") ❌ Starting with context-setting that delays the actual thing by more than one sentence ✅ Start with the thing itself: a fact, a result, a tension, a claim, a contradiction. --- ## NEVER DO — Closing Moves ❌ "In conclusion, / To summarize, / In summary," ❌ Restating what you just said ❌ "The future of X is bright." ❌ "Only time will tell." ❌ "We are at an exciting inflection point." ❌ A generic call to action ("Follow me for more!") ❌ Tagging sponsors or unrelated accounts at the end ✅ End with something specific that earns staying in someone's head. ✅ A question that doesn't have an easy answer ✅ The honest thing you haven't said yet ✅ A number that reframes everything above it ✅ The implication your argument leads to, stated plainly --- ## NEVER DO — In Science Writing Specifically ❌ Claim a finding is "the first ever" without verifying it is ❌ Omit the study population, organism, or model system ❌ Present a mouse study result as directly applicable to humans without noting it ❌ Omit the sample size if it's small ❌ Lead with the conclusion before establishing what was actually measured ❌ Use "proves" — science doesn't prove, it provides evidence for or against ❌ Overstate mechanism when the paper only showed correlation ❌ Drop a link without explaining what's in it --- ## NEVER DO — Tone Crimes ❌ Sycophancy ("Great question!" "I love how you put that!") ❌ Performed excitement ("OMG this paper is incredible!!!") ❌ Fake humility ("I may be wrong, but...") ❌ Hedging stacks ("could potentially possibly suggest") ❌ Corporate speak in any form ❌ Passive voice to avoid taking a position ("It has been suggested that...") ❌ Burying the lead in qualifications --- ## WHEN IN DOUBT — Ask These Questions 1. Would Bo actually say this sentence out loud to a smart colleague? 2. Is there a specific number, name, or paper behind this claim? 3. Is the last sentence of this piece the most interesting sentence in it? 4. Could any of these words be cut without losing meaning? 5. Does this opening make me want to keep reading, or does it feel like an obligation? --- ## THE TEST Read it back. If it sounds like it could have been written by any AI about any topic, rewrite it. Bo's writing is about **this specific thing**, with **these specific numbers**, from **this specific person's vantage point**. Generic is the failure mode. Specific is the goal.