---

name: ors-writing-style description: Use when polishing the prose and notation of an Operations Research (OR) manuscript — enforcing the equation-free introduction, the text-only abstract under 200 words, clean theorem-proof exposition, and INFORMS author-year house style. Polishes language and house style; it does not formulate the model (ors-theory-development) or run the submission preflight (ors-submission).

Writing Style & House Style (ors-writing-style)

When to trigger

• Drafts are complete and you want them to read like an Operations Research paper.
• The introduction contains equations, or the abstract is over 200 words or full of symbols.
• You need consistent notation, theorem exposition, and author-year citations.

OR's distinctive style rules

• Equation-free introduction (hard rule): the introduction must clearly state the problem, the results, and their significance to the OR community and must contain no equations or mathematical notation. Write each result as "we show that ..." in plain language. This is a distinctive OR accessibility requirement.
• Abstract: must not exceed 200 words and should be text-only — minimize math symbols and avoid accented variables. State the problem, approach, and headline result in prose.
• Keywords: up to three.
• Citations: author-year style, e.g., "(Norman 1977)" or "Norman (1977)". Keep the reference list in the INFORMS author-year convention.

Theorem-proof exposition

• Lead each formal result with a one-sentence plain-language statement of what it means before the symbols.
• Keep the main text focused on ideas and proof sketches; route long proofs to the e-companion (which must not be longer than the manuscript).
• Define notation once, near first use; provide a notation table if the model is heavy.
• Use consistent symbols across model, theorems, exhibits, and appendix.

Format and clarity

• Manuscript format: 1.5-spaced, 11-point font, 1-inch margins; submit as a PDF (source LaTeX/Word on acceptance); use the provided LaTeX style files.
• Prefer precise, active prose; avoid vague "novel/important" without the specific delta (that lives in ors-contribution-framing).
• Make every claim either proved (cite the theorem) or empirically supported (cite the exhibit) — no unsupported assertions.

Prose pushback patterns OR referees raise (with the fix)

Referee remark	What it really flags	Venue-specific fix
"Introduction is hard to follow"	equations/notation leaked into the intro	rewrite every result as a plain-language "we show that ..." line; banish all symbols
"Abstract is impenetrable"	symbol-laden, over 200 words	text-only rewrite stating problem, approach, headline result in prose
"Theorem statements are dense"	symbols precede meaning	lead each formal result with a one-sentence plain-language reading, then the math
"Notation is inconsistent"	symbol drift across model/proof/exhibit	one notation table; define once near first use; reconcile end-to-end
"Main text is bloated by proofs"	three-page derivation inline	move it to the e-companion (which must not exceed the manuscript); keep a sketch
"Claims feel unsupported"	assertion with no theorem/exhibit anchor	tie every claim to a proved result or a numbered exhibit; delete the rest

These are Operations Research style flags, not generic copy-editing. As the INFORMS flagship, OR enforces the equation-free intro precisely so a non-specialist optimizer, queueing theorist, or simulation methodologist can read the contribution across methodological silos — a bar empirical-OM venues do not set.

Equation-free rewrite micro-example (illustrative)

Before (forbidden in the intro): "We prove that the policy minimizing E[∑ₜ γᵗ c(xₜ,aₜ)] is a threshold rule with threshold s* solving g(s*)=0."

After (intro-legal): "We show that the cost-minimizing replenishment policy is a simple threshold rule — order up to a single critical level — and we characterize that level."

The symbols, the discount factor, and the optimality equation move to the model section; the introduction keeps only the decision-relevant reading. This is the single most common style repair on first-round OR revisions.

Self-audit before handing to ors-submission

• Introduction: zero equations, zero notation; problem + results + OR significance in words
• Abstract: text-only, ≤ 200 words, no accented variables; up to 3 keywords
• Every theorem opens with a plain-language sentence before symbols
• Single consistent notation system across model, proofs, exhibits, e-companion
• Author-year citations throughout; reference list in INFORMS convention
• Long proofs in the e-companion (≤ manuscript length), sketch retained in main text

Anti-patterns

• Equations or notation in the introduction (violates the equation-free rule).
• A 250-word, symbol-laden abstract.
• Mixing citation styles or drifting from author-year.
• Dumping a three-page proof into the main text instead of the e-companion.
• Notation that changes between the model section and the proofs.

Output format

【Intro】equation-free? problem/results/significance in words? 
【Abstract】≤200 words, text-only? word count: ...
【Citations】author-year consistent? 
【Theorem exposition】plain-language lead + e-companion routing?
【Format】1.5-spaced / 11-pt / LaTeX style files
【Next step】ors-submission