Used and loved by millions
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
be identified by
Grammar usage guide and real-world examplesUSAGE SUMMARY
The phrase "be identified by" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing how someone or something is recognized or distinguished by certain characteristics or identifiers. Example: "In the study, participants will be identified by their unique ID numbers to ensure confidentiality."
✓ Grammatically correct
News & Media
Science
Encyclopedias
Wiki
Alternative expressions(17)
Table of contents
Usage summary
Human-verified examples
Expert writing tips
Linguistic context
Ludwig's wrap-up
Alternative expressions
FAQs
Human-verified examples from authoritative sources
Exact Expressions
55 human-written examples
The F.B.I. official declined to be identified by name.
News & Media
He allowed himself to be identified by name -- Capt.
News & Media
The driver would have to be identified by dental records.
News & Media
The aide refused to be identified by name.
News & Media
Owners would have to be identified by photograph and fingerprints.
News & Media
Fibres can be identified by differential staining and microscopic examination.
Encyclopedias
(He too could only be identified by one name).
News & Media
Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources
Similar Expressions
4 human-written examples
His body was identified by relatives.
News & Media
The patients were identified by first names.
News & Media
(The insects were identified by entomologists).
News & Media
He was identified by his fingerprints.
News & Media
Expert writing Tips
Best practice
When using "be identified by", ensure that the characteristic or method of identification is clearly and explicitly stated. For example: "The suspect could be identified by a distinctive tattoo on his left arm."
Common error
Avoid using "be identified by" without specifying how something is identified. Instead of saying "The problem can be identified by", specify, "The problem can be identified by analyzing the error logs."
Source & Trust
81%
Authority and reliability
4.1/5
Expert rating
Real-world application tested
Linguistic Context
The phrase "be identified by" functions as part of a passive construction, indicating the means or method through which something can be recognized or determined. As Ludwig AI confirms, it's suitable for describing recognition based on specific characteristics. For instance, "Molecules can be identified by the time it takes them to reach the detector."
Frequent in
News & Media
30%
Science
30%
Wiki
15%
Less common in
Encyclopedias
10%
Formal & Business
8%
Reference
7%
Ludwig's WRAP-UP
In summary, "be identified by" is a commonly used phrase that serves to explain how something is recognized or distinguished. As Ludwig AI confirms, it is considered correct and usable in written English. It frequently appears in news, science, and encyclopedic contexts, indicating its versatility across different domains. Remember to clearly state the identifiers to avoid vagueness, and choose active or passive voice depending on whether the actor or the identifier is more important. Alternatives such as "be recognized through" or "be distinguished by" can add variety to your writing.
More alternative expressions(10)
Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:
be recognized through
Focuses on the act of recognizing something based on certain features, similar to identifying.
be distinguished by
Highlights the unique characteristics that set something apart, allowing for identification.
be determined by
Emphasizes the process of finding something out or establishing it, which relates to identification.
be ascertained through
Stresses the process of discovering something definitely, much like the outcome of identification.
be known by
Indicates that something is famous or easily recognized due to certain traits.
be classified by
Relates to putting things into categories based on specific criteria, closely linked to how things are identified.
be characterized by
Describes the attributes that define something, aiding in its identification.
be marked by
Highlights the distinctive signs or features that make something identifiable.
be revealed through
Suggests that identification happens by uncovering something that was not previously clear.
be diagnosed via
Implies a formal process of identification, typically in medical or technical contexts.
FAQs
How can I rephrase "be identified by" to sound more formal?
For a more formal tone, consider using phrases like "be recognized through", "be ascertained through", or "be distinguished by", depending on the context.
Is it better to use active or passive voice with "be identified by"?
The choice depends on the context. Passive voice is suitable when the identifier is more important than the actor: "The gene is identified by its unique sequence." Active voice is appropriate when the actor is important: "Researchers identify the gene by its unique sequence."
What are some common mistakes when using the phrase "be identified by"?
A common mistake is failing to specify what allows for the identification. Always provide the specific characteristics or methods used for identification to avoid ambiguity. For example, avoid saying: "Species can be identified by" instead, specify: "Species can be identified by their DNA."
Can "be identified by" be used in scientific writing?
Yes, "be identified by" is commonly used in scientific writing to describe how elements, compounds, or organisms are recognized. For instance: "The compound can be identified by its spectral signature."
Editing plus AI, all in one place.
Stop switching between tools. Your AI writing partner for everything—polishing proposals, crafting emails, finding the right tone.
Table of contents
Usage summary
Human-verified examples
Expert writing tips
Linguistic context
Ludwig's wrap-up
Alternative expressions
FAQs
Source & Trust
81%
Authority and reliability
4.1/5
Expert rating
Real-world application tested