Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigThe phrase "are sufficient to proof" is not correct in English.
Did you mean "are sufficient to prove"? You can use the corrected phrase when discussing evidence or arguments that adequately demonstrate a point or conclusion.
Example: "The data collected from the experiment are sufficient to prove the hypothesis."
Alternatives: "are enough to demonstrate" or "are adequate to establish".
Similar(60)
Because most people can remember three things; three is sufficient to provide proof of a pattern, and three gives an impression of completeness.
Weight Watchers officials said the number of participants was sufficient to provide statistical proof that the new diet system works.
As we know, it is sufficient to complete the proof of Theorem 1 once we obtain Lemma 6.
In the following it is sufficient to consider the proof of Theorem 1.7 as an a priori estimate, therefore assuming a priori that.
In the following by the elementary approximation argument as [3, 12] it is sufficient to consider the proof of (1.8) under the additional assumption that.
Proof It is sufficient to take z = y in the proof of Theorem 3.4.
Again the basis is that because the proof was sufficient to establish the participation of each petitioner in one or more of several smaller conspiracies, none of them could have been prejudiced because all were found guilty, upon such proof, of being members of a single larger conspiracy of the same general character.
To secure a conviction, the body of evidence presented at the trial must be sufficient to meet the standard of proof.
On this theory, the evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance of proof standard when the best-available hypothesis that explains the evidence and the underlying events include all of the elements of the claim.
More specifically, Coffman stands for the proposition that the heeding presumption is sufficient to sustain plaintiff's burden of proof on proximate causation where the "defendant produces no evidence to overcome the presumption". 257 N.J.
Proof It is sufficient to prove the case i = 1.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com