matching evidence

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "matching evidence" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing data, research, or arguments that correspond or align with each other in a supportive manner. Example: "The study presented matching evidence that supports the hypothesis proposed by the researchers."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

3 human-written examples

The present results also demonstrate that oxidative stress generated by increased MAO activity causes mitochondrial dysfunction, matching evidence obtained in neonatal cardiac myocytes [40].

Free Radical Biology and Medicine

Thus, the results of our study provide matching evidence for ongoing selection on eda in Baltic Sea three-spined sticklebacks, and act as a proof-of-principle demonstration that the uncovered signatures of selection are likely to be real, rather than methodological artifacts or noise.

BMC Biology

Despite considerable research on substance-abuse placement matching, evidence is still inconclusive.

BMC Psychiatry

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

57 human-written examples

We defined an optimal knowledge standard as responses matching evidence-based responses derived from our previous literature review.

BMC Infectious Diseases

His DNA matched evidence from the scene, while none of the arrested sailors, who numbered seven at one point, had DNA that matched the evidence.

The New York Times

Mr. Reyes eventually confessed, and his DNA matched evidence found on the Central Park victim.

The New York Times

The DNA profile matched evidence from a 2003 rape, and he was convicted of that crime.

The New York Times

Mr. Reyes eventually confessed to the Central Park rape, and his DNA matched evidence found on the victim.

The New York Times

So far, of 153 kits tested, 21 match evidence in a criminal database and may involve serial rapists.

The New York Times

His DNA profile matched evidence from a rape in 2003, and he was convicted of that rape.

The New York Times

The convicted rapist, Matias Reyes, eventually confessed, and his DNA matched evidence found on the Central Park victim.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "matching evidence", ensure that the connection between the evidence and the claim is clearly articulated. Avoid ambiguity by explicitly stating how the evidence supports the argument.

Common error

Avoid claiming that evidence is "perfectly matching" if there are any discrepancies or limitations. Overstating the match can undermine the credibility of your argument. Instead, acknowledge any nuances or caveats.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "matching evidence" functions as a verb phrase + noun, where "matching" acts as a present participle modifying the noun "evidence". According to Ludwig AI, it is grammatically correct and implies a relationship of correspondence or agreement between different pieces of information.

Expression frequency: Rare

Frequent in

News & Media

33%

Science

33%

Academia

33%

Less common in

Formal & Business

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "matching evidence" is a grammatically sound phrase used to indicate that different pieces of evidence correspond or align with each other. While Ludwig AI confirms its correctness, its frequency is relatively rare. It finds its use primarily in scientific and news-related contexts. When using this phrase, ensure clarity in articulating the relationship between the evidence and the argument, and avoid overstating the strength of the match. Consider alternatives like "corresponding proof" or "aligned data" depending on the context and desired level of formality.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

corresponding proof

Replaces "evidence" with "proof", emphasizing the certainty of the matching information.

aligned data

Substitutes "evidence" with "data", suitable when referring to numerical or statistical information.

corroborating facts

Uses "corroborating" to stress the supporting nature of the facts, offering a more formal tone.

consistent findings

Replaces "evidence" with "findings", fitting in research or investigative contexts where results are aligned.

harmonious details

A more descriptive alternative that highlights the agreement between specific details.

agreeing information

Focuses on the consensus between different pieces of information or data.

supportive facts

Emphasizes that facts are helping to prove something, which could be a theory or an argument.

complementary data

Highlights that different sets of data add to each other to create an image.

corresponding data

It emphasizes that the evidence presented matches data already collected, reinforcing its reliability.

equivalent evidence

Highlights that the matching evidence is considered to be identical.

FAQs

How can I effectively use "matching evidence" in a research paper?

When presenting "matching evidence" in a research paper, clearly state the hypothesis or claim, then introduce the evidence and explain how it supports your argument. Use phrases like "This "evidence suggests"" or "These findings "evidence supports"" to strengthen the connection.

What are some alternatives to "matching evidence" in legal writing?

In legal writing, consider using stronger and more precise alternatives such as "corroborating evidence", "consistent findings", or "aligned data". These terms can add weight to your arguments and clearly demonstrate the alignment of the evidence with your claims.

Is it appropriate to use "matching evidence" in informal contexts?

While "matching evidence" is grammatically correct, it may sound overly formal in casual conversations. In informal contexts, simpler alternatives like "similar findings" or "corresponding data" might be more appropriate, unless you want to be very persuasive.

How does "matching evidence" differ from "conflicting evidence"?

"Matching evidence" indicates that different pieces of information align and support the same conclusion, while "conflicting evidence" suggests that pieces of information contradict each other. Recognizing and addressing conflicting evidence is crucial for a balanced and thorough analysis. For example, you may face "countervailing evidence" when building your model.