required to prove

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "required to prove" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in contexts where someone must demonstrate or establish the truth of something, often in legal, academic, or formal settings. Example: "In order to win the case, the plaintiff is required to prove that the defendant was negligent."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

Accusers are required to prove their allegations.

The New York Times

Non-executive directors are being required to prove their competence.

The Guardian - Opinion

A sort of spiritual innumeracy is required to prove that he is a serious person.

The New Yorker

They are still not required to prove that the active ingredients work or are safe.

The New York Times - Sports

No trial was required to prove Saddam's guilt; no punishment could be commensurate to his offenses.

The New Yorker

And the company did so without being required to prove that the drug actually works.

The New York Times

He also said that commercial advertisers are not required to prove their claims.

The New York Times

To receive settlements, plaintiffs will not be required to prove that Vioxx caused their heart attacks or strokes.

The New York Times

Those without jobs will also be required to prove they are already actively looking for work before registering for benefits.

The Guardian

"Is the state required to prove every day that someone committed an offense beyond a reasonable doubt?" Mr. Nixon asked.

The New York Times

The prosecution will be required to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard for trials of U.S. citizens.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "required to prove" in legal or academic writing, ensure that you clearly define what needs to be proven and the standards of evidence required.

Common error

Avoid using "required to prove" in overly informal contexts; it can sound stilted. Opt for simpler alternatives like "need to show" or "have to demonstrate" for everyday conversation.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "required to prove" functions as an infinitive phrase expressing obligation or necessity. It is typically used to indicate what must be demonstrated or validated. Ludwig's examples show its use in legal, scientific, and general contexts.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

Science

55%

News & Media

35%

Formal & Business

10%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "required to prove" is a phrase used to express the necessity of demonstrating or validating a claim, fact, or hypothesis. Ludwig AI confirms it is grammatically correct and frequently appears in formal writing, scientific studies, and news reports. When opting for alternative phrasing, consider the context to maintain the appropriate level of formality and precision. While "required to prove" is widely applicable, it’s vital to ensure that the specific conditions and standards of evidence are clearly defined in the text.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

necessary to demonstrate

Replaces "required" with "necessary" and "prove" with "demonstrate", emphasizing the essential nature of the demonstration.

needed to substantiate

Uses "needed" instead of "required" and "substantiate" in place of "prove", highlighting the act of providing evidence.

must establish

Employs "must" for obligation and "establish" for proof, conveying a stronger sense of necessity.

obligated to verify

Substitutes "required" with "obligated" and "prove" with "verify", stressing the duty to confirm the truth.

incumbent upon to validate

Replaces "required" with the more formal "incumbent upon" and "prove" with "validate", adding a layer of formality.

essential to confirm

Uses "essential" to convey necessity and "confirm" to denote the act of verifying.

crucial to evidence

Replaces "required" with "crucial" and "prove" with "evidence", emphasizing the importance of providing evidence.

demanded to ascertain

Employs "demanded" to stress the insistence and "ascertain" to mean finding something out for certain.

expected to justify

Substitutes "required" with "expected" and "prove" with "justify", indicating an anticipation of explanation and support.

compelled to demonstrate

Uses "compelled" to indicate obligation and "demonstrate" to show or exhibit clearly.

FAQs

How can I use "required to prove" in a sentence?

You can use "required to prove" when indicating that someone needs to demonstrate the truth or validity of something. For example, "The prosecution is required to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

What are some alternatives to "required to prove"?

Alternatives include "necessary to demonstrate", "needed to substantiate", or "must establish", depending on the nuance you want to convey.

Is it better to use "required to prove" or "necessary to prove"?

"Required to prove" and "necessary to prove" are often interchangeable, but "required" suggests a rule or obligation, while "necessary" implies a need for a specific outcome. The best choice depends on the context.

In what situations is "required to prove" most appropriate?

"Required to prove" is particularly appropriate in formal contexts such as legal documents, academic papers, and official reports, where precision and clarity are essential.