Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(7)
In view of Lemma 2.1, we may suppose without loss of generality that.
We may suppose, without loss of generality, that (|varphi (z_{i})|>1/2) for all (iin {mathbb{N}}).
So we may suppose without loss of generality that T t x n ⇀ v ∗ and J x n ⇀ j ∗ for some v ∗, j ∗ ∈ X ∗.
Hence, { v j } ⊂ W 0 1, P is a bounded sequence, and we may suppose, without loss of generality, that v j ⇀ v in W 0 1, P.
Hence { v j } ⊂ W 0 1, p ( x ) is a bounded sequence, and we may suppose, without loss ofgenerality, that v j ⇀ v in W 0 1, p ( x ).
We may suppose, without loss of generality, that Y and Z do not commute since, if they do commute, the inequality is trivially true, just as in Remark 1.5.
Similar(53)
Without loss of generality, we may suppose that | u | ≤ | v |.
Without loss of generality, we may suppose that (alpha=b).
Without loss of generality, we may suppose that in.
Without loss of generality, we may suppose that (3.42).
Without loss of generality, we may suppose that.
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