Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
The phrase "better not to include" is correct and commonly used in written English.
It is typically used to suggest that something should not be included or included in something. Here is an example: "It's better not to include personal opinions in a research paper as it can weaken the credibility of your argument."
Exact(7)
"It would have been better not to include it," Donald H. Rumsfeld, the secretary of defense, said on television on Sunday, when asked why his boss was citing foreign intelligence reports instead of his own.
The provision of such treatments is variable and discretionary, however, so that even though their provision definitely indicates disability, it seems better not to include them in the definition adopted for the Magpie Trial.
MWJvP6: As there are several different strains of H. influenzae sequenced, I thought it better not to include these strains next to the H. influenzae rd KW20, as they do not represent independent measurements.
If no such cluster can be found for a given protein it might be better not to include it in an incohesive cluster but rather add it as a singleton.
If the true value of the coefficients of is zero, because the imputation model is correctly specified without the terms, it is probably better not to include these terms and instead accept some overestimation of : imputation will be more efficient if they are set to zero rather than estimated.
However, if we want to curate only GC-related sentences, it would be better not to include the TFs in the list of genes used as a filter because the terms related to an effect found in a sentence with a GC are also found in sentences that contain only information on RIs.
Similar(53)
Better not to presume.
Better not to force it.
Better not to get sick.
Better not to vaccinate.
"Well," I said, "Wouldn't it be better to include everyone and put our labels aside?
More suggestions(15)
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