Exact(1)
In order to simplify our argumentation we use the logarithm of Weibull times.
Similar(59)
For our argumentation, we cannot use arbitrary subdivisions and need very special properties of the conditional simplexes in which we subdivide.
We omit the (easy) proof, since it follows exactly the same line of argumentation that we used to prove the preceding proposition.
If y ∗ is not constant on ( 0, 2 s 0 ), then we use analogous argumentation.
In the proofs of Theorems 1.2 and 1.3 we use some standard argumentation, which we formulate here as lemmas.
We use the notion of argumentation frameworks to capture the first feature.
We used argumentation-oriented textual analysis to unravel prevalent practices that dominate the creationist evolutionist debate.
For the assertion (6) we can use the argumentation given for (2), with (A) replaced by (exists sigma.{d}).{d}
The assertion (18) holds when (mathsf {Self}in Phi ^dag ) because we can use the argumentation given for (2), with (A) replaced by (exists r.mathsf {Self}).
The assertion (9) holds when (O in Phi ^dag ) because we can use the argumentation given for (2), with (A) replaced by ({a}).
In this email, Verstraeten states, "I do not wish to be the advocate of the anti-vaccine lobby and sound like being convinced that thimerosal is or was harmful, but at least I feel we should use sound scientific argumentation and not let our standards be dictated by our desire to disprove an unpleasant theory".
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