indirect proof

USAGE SUMMARY

"indirect proof" is a correct and usable phrase in written English.
You would use it to refer to evidence or arguments that are used to support a statement but do not provide conclusive proof of its truth. For example, "The indirect proof provided by the defense's evidence was not sufficient to prove the defendant's innocence."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

Academia

News & Media

Encyclopedias

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

I am going to give you an indirect proof.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

bands correlated with structural order for the indirect proof.

Polymer

Reduction and indirect proof together suffice to prove all moods not in the first figure.

Britannica

For nonviral gene delivery particles (lipid- or polymer-based), indirect proof of nuclear entry during mitosis is provided.

Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews

Yet Theophrastus himself allowed certain modal moods that, combined with the principle of indirect proof (which he likewise accepted), yield results that perhaps violate this rule.

Britannica

Detecting gravitational waves has long been a goal of astrophysicists; a Nobel prize was handed out in 1993 for indirect proof of their existence.

The Economist

The results from the PC-rich blend show that the indirect proof is very sensitive, but a detailed knowledge of the crystallinity is necessary for a correct analysis.

Polymer

A smart writer, Bates skilfully unpicks the events that led up to Cook's death, though he brushes over the "poisons panic" of the 1840s, flourishing contemporary debates about press prejudice, and the fallibility of direct and indirect proof.

The Guardian - Books

The next few handouts are a guide to proofs that discusses elements of good proofwriting, a survey of mathematical vocabulary that you're likely to use in the course of the problem set, and a guide to indirect proof techniques.

Stanford University

They have never been seen directly, though an indirect proof of their existence, based on studying a pair of collapsed stars, was rewarded with the 1993 Nobel prize in physics.

The Economist

A form of the reductio ad absurdum argument, known as indirect proof or reductio ad impossibile, is one that proves a proposition by showing that its denial conjoined with other propositions previously proved or accepted leads to a contradiction.

Encyclopedia Britannica

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "indirect proof", ensure you clearly explain the logical steps connecting the evidence to your conclusion, making the inference as explicit as possible for your audience.

Common error

Avoid assuming that because two things are related, one directly proves the other. "Indirect proof" often relies on correlation, but correlation doesn't automatically mean causation.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "indirect proof" functions primarily as a noun phrase. It refers to evidence or arguments that support a statement, but do not provide conclusive verification. As Ludwig AI explained, it is correct and usable in written English. The examples in Ludwig illustrate usage across diverse contexts.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

Science

54%

Academia

15%

News & Media

10%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

5%

Wiki

1%

Formal & Business

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "indirect proof" is a grammatically correct and frequently used noun phrase referring to evidence that supports a claim without definitively proving it. As Ludwig AI confirms, it is appropriate for various formal contexts, particularly science and academia. Examples on Ludwig demonstrate its utility across multiple fields. While often persuasive, it's crucial to ensure a solid logical connection between evidence and conclusion, avoiding the pitfall of mistaking correlation for causation. When seeking alternatives, phrases like ""circumstantial evidence"" or ""inferential evidence"" can provide nuanced substitutions.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

circumstantial evidence

Focuses on evidence that suggests a fact but doesn't prove it directly. Shifts the focus from logical proof to legal evidence.

inferential evidence

Emphasizes the process of drawing conclusions from available information, rather than the proof itself.

evidence by implication

Highlights that the evidence suggests something without explicitly stating it. Provides a more descriptive alternative.

deductive reasoning

Focuses on the type of reasoning used to reach a conclusion rather than the proof itself, emphasizing the logical process.

reasoning by contradiction

Specifies a particular method of proof, similar to reductio ad absurdum, where you demonstrate a claim by showing its opposite leads to a contradiction.

corroborating evidence

Highlights the aspect of confirming or supporting a claim through additional evidence that may not be direct proof itself.

supportive evidence

Indicates that the evidence lends weight to a claim, but doesn't definitively prove it. Simplifies the concept of indirectness.

implied proof

Suggests the proof is not stated explicitly but is understood or inferred. Offers a more concise alternative.

presumptive evidence

Describes evidence that is assumed to be true unless proven otherwise. Offers a more formal and legalistic nuance.

attenuated proof

Emphasizes the weakening of the proof, which is only indirect or partial. Is a more technical alternative.

FAQs

How does "indirect proof" differ from direct proof?

Direct proof establishes a claim through a straightforward chain of reasoning. "Indirect proof", on the other hand, supports a claim by showing that alternative explanations are unlikely or impossible. Alternatives include "circumstantial evidence" or "inferential evidence".

What are some contexts where "indirect proof" is commonly used?

"Indirect proof" is frequently employed in mathematics, science, and law when direct evidence is unavailable or difficult to obtain. It relies on logical deduction and inference.

Can "indirect proof" be considered as strong as direct proof?

While "indirect proof" can be convincing, it's generally considered less definitive than direct proof. The strength of an "indirect proof" depends on the quality and comprehensiveness of the evidence, as well as the validity of the inferences drawn. As alternative consider "supportive evidence".

What makes an "indirect proof" convincing?

A convincing "indirect proof" requires a strong chain of reasoning, reliable evidence, and the elimination of plausible alternative explanations. The more thoroughly alternative possibilities are ruled out, the stronger the "indirect proof" becomes. An alternative could be "implied proof".