review for faults

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "review for faults" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when assessing something for errors or issues, such as a document, project, or product. Example: "Before submitting the final report, please review for faults to ensure everything is accurate."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

News & Media

Formal & Business

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

60 human-written examples

The same taxonomy is used in a systematic literature review of solutions for fault-tolerant composite services.

Journal of Software Engineering Research and Development

The present review of EAs used for fault diagnosis can be broadly divided into two sections, as shown in Fig. 3.

Chinese Journal of Mechanical Engineering

His boss read several comments from the review that faulted him for poor communication, failure to effectively articulate a strategy for the business, and a tendency to isolate himself from his team.

Harvard Business Review

Look out for faults.

WikiHow

Look for faults in the machine itself.

WikiHow

The Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Joseph J. Ellis, in a review for The Washington Post, praised its "stylistic brilliance" but faulted "Morris's scholarly shenanigans".

The New York Times - Books

The review investigates how existing approaches for fault-tolerant composite services address design diversity issues and also specific issues related to SOA.

Journal of Software Engineering Research and Development

The host of the PBS show "Finding Your Roots" has apologized after a PBS review faulted him for his handling of a show about Ben Affleck.

Los Angeles Times

Watch a video review of The Fault in Our Stars.

The Guardian - Film

Signature video Her review of The Fault in Our Stars by John Green, the bestselling YA author and a big hero for Vliegenthart.

The Guardian - Tech

An internal NASA review in September faulted the agency's handling of the cargo contracts.

Los Angeles Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "review for faults", be specific about the type of faults you are looking for. For instance, instead of saying "review the document for faults", specify "review the document for grammatical and factual faults".

Common error

Avoid using "review for faults" without defining the area of concern, the reader might assume the phrase refers to everything, leaving them unsure where to focus their attention. Specify the kind of faults you are looking for to provide clear direction.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "review for faults" primarily functions as a verb phrase, indicating the action of examining something with the specific intention of identifying errors, defects, or shortcomings. As Ludwig AI indicates, this phrase is grammatically correct and usable.

Expression frequency: Missing

Frequent in

Science

0%

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Less common in

Science

0%

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "review for faults" is a grammatically correct phrase used to indicate the process of examining something for errors or shortcomings. Although Ludwig AI confirms its correctness, its absence of usage examples suggests a lack of specific contextual application or potentially a preference for more descriptive or formal alternatives. When employing this phrase, be specific about the type of faults you're seeking to avoid ambiguity and ensure clear communication. Better alternatives are "check for defects", "inspect for errors", or "examine for flaws", depending on the context.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

Check for defects

Replaces "review" with "check" and "faults" with "defects", emphasizing a search for imperfections.

Inspect for errors

Uses "inspect" instead of "review" and "errors" instead of "faults", suggesting a more detailed examination.

Examine for flaws

Substitutes "examine" for "review" and "flaws" for "faults", indicating a careful investigation for imperfections.

Assess for shortcomings

Replaces "review" with "assess" and "faults" with "shortcomings", offering a more formal tone.

Scrutinize for imperfections

Uses "scrutinize" instead of "review" and "imperfections" instead of "faults", conveying a rigorous and critical evaluation.

Audit for deficiencies

Substitutes "review" with "audit" and "faults" with "deficiencies", appropriate in a formal or business context.

Evaluate for vulnerabilities

Replaces "faults" with "vulnerabilities", shifting the focus to potential weaknesses.

Investigate for problems

Uses "investigate" to suggest a more in-depth search for "problems" rather than simply reviewing for faults.

Analyze for weaknesses

Replaces "review" with "analyze" and "faults" with "weaknesses", framing the examination as an analytical process.

Go over for mistakes

Uses "go over" as a more casual alternative to "review", and "mistakes" instead of "faults".

FAQs

How can I use "review for faults" in a sentence?

While "review for faults" is grammatically correct, it's more effective to specify the type of faults. For example, "Please "review the report for factual errors"" is clearer than "review the report for faults".

What's a good alternative to "review for faults"?

Alternatives include phrases like "check for defects", "inspect for errors", or "examine for flaws", depending on the context and desired level of formality.

Is "review for faults" formal or informal?

While not overly informal, "review for faults" leans towards a neutral register. More formal alternatives might include "assess for shortcomings" or "audit for deficiencies".

What kind of documents should I "review for faults"?

You can "review for faults" any document, project, or system that needs evaluation. Be specific about the type of "faults" you're seeking, such as "grammatical errors", "design flaws", or "system vulnerabilities".