Describing a new invention as groundbreaking or revolutionary makes a patent examiner significantly less likely to approve the application.

Professional evaluators have a built-in bias against promotional language, even when the underlying technology is objectively superior. This creates a penalty for being enthusiastic about a discovery. We assume that if something is truly novel, using strong adjectives would help highlight its importance to the world. Instead, this language triggers skepticism in experts who view marketing as a sign of lower quality. It means the most innovative ideas are often buried under the most boring, clinical descriptions to survive the review process.