The phrase "as a regularity" is correct and commonly used in written English.
It is typically used as an adverbial phrase to indicate that something occurs in a regular or frequent manner. Example: As a regularity, she would wake up at 6 am every morning to go for a run before work.
The problems of explanatory asymmetries and explanatory irrelevance described in section 2.5 seem to show that the holding of a law (understood as a regularity) between $C$ and $E$ is not sufficient for $C$ to cause $E$; hence not a sufficient condition for $C$ to figure in an explanation of $E$.
Hume (2012), in a similar vein, stated three conditions known as a regularity theory of causality: constant conjunction (that if A causes B, we should always experience B when we experience A); temporal priority (that if A causes B, A should precede B); and contiguity (that if A causes B, then A and B should be spatially and temporally adjacent).
If a putative law has broad scope, great explanatory power, and appealing simplicity, it may be more reasonable, Swinburne argues, to retain the law (defined as a regularity that virtually invariably holds) and to accept that the event in question is a non-repeatable counter-instance of that law than to throw out the law and create a vastly more complex law that accommodates the event.
In general, a law is defined as a regularity that is valid across time and space.6 The fact that laws are valid across time (cf. D) means, among others, that they are valid in future to some extent; thus, we can use them for prediction; as we will see later, there are different ways to extend laws across time (i.e., across the time interval (D) to which our models refer).
Resembling many of the chunky-soled shoes that have treaded the runway in recent collections of Raf Simons, Acne and Marni, the Dr. Martens Farrell is a fresh alternative that can be worn with as much regularity as a favorite sneaker.
Different degrees of geometric irregularity in the honeycomb cells, as quantified using a regularity parameter, have been employed.
Both in the selected model as in the rest, a regularity takes hold: the short term cycles are important elements in explaining the fluctuations of output.
Because of this construction, the FF-decoded message (hat {U}=(hat {u}_{1},hat {u}_{2},cdots,hat {u}_{n})) has a regularity as follows: hat{u}_{n}=hat{m}_{n}oplushat{u}_{n-1}.
These patterns that we accept as guides we come to think of as laws: a law is a regularity that we accept for purposes of prediction and contrary-to-fact inference.
Hence, it satisfies the Euler-Lagrange equation (as a classical solution by the regularity argument) ( − 1 ) M u ( 2 M ) ( x ) = λ 1 r ˜ ( x ) u ( x ) ( − s ≤ x ≤ s ).
Our argument also relies on suitable extension techniques and on an estimate on the decay of the eigenfunctions at the boundary which could be interpreted as a boundary regularity result.
