was categorized with

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "was categorized with" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when describing how something is grouped or classified alongside other items or categories. Example: "The new species was categorized with other similar plants in the botanical database."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

20 human-written examples

The motility response of the parasites was categorized with specific score 3, 2, 1, 0 respectively.

Clinical Phytoscience

This distribution shows that no face was categorized with complete accuracy (100%) or inaccuracy (0%).

Plosone

Although Abi2 is one of the 49 genes with known splicings, it was categorized with the 85 functional genes.

Plosone

These frequencies show that no target was categorized with complete accuracy or inaccuracy and that perceivers did not reach complete consensus for any single face.

Plosone

Body mass index (BMI) at baseline and each semiannual visit was categorized with <18.5 kilogram per meter squared (kg/m2) as underweight, 18.5 24.9 kg/m2 as normal weight, 25 29.9 kg/m2 as overweight, and ≥30 kg/m2 as obese [13], [14].

Plosone

Ontology was categorized with respect to Molecular Function, Biological Process, and Cellular Component.

BMC Genomics

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

39 human-written examples

But those communities' reactions have less to do with tolerating crime than with the indignity that comes with being categorized with criminals.

The New Yorker

"What's really at stake," said Robert Thompson, professor of media and pop culture at Syracuse University, "is one big decision: Are these shows going to be categorized with W.W.F.

The New York Times - Arts

"It's a great award and a privilege to be categorized with some of the other players that are being considered," White told reporters last Monday.

The New York Times - Sports

Until the mid-1870s the new "French Flats" were categorized with private houses under "First Class Dwellings," even though they were technically tenement houses.

The New York Times

Or are they going to be categorized with 'Jeopardy' and other game shows, where you're not supposed to fool around with reality?" The F.C.C. could, of course, decide that the charges against "Manhunt" are baseless or out of its jurisdiction, in which case those seeking answers would surely be disappointed.

The New York Times - Arts

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "was categorized with", ensure that the categories are clearly defined and relevant to the subject being discussed. Avoid ambiguity by providing specific criteria for categorization.

Common error

Avoid using "was categorized with" when the categorization criteria are subjective or poorly defined. Ensure the categories are mutually exclusive to prevent overlap and confusion.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "was categorized with" functions as a passive voice construction used to describe the act of classifying something into a group. It is a way of indicating that a subject has been placed into a category based on certain criteria. Ludwig provides examples where "was categorized with" is used to classify various entities, like diseases or research output.

Expression frequency: Common

Frequent in

Science

79%

News & Media

17%

Formal & Business

4%

Less common in

Academia

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "was categorized with" is a grammatically correct and commonly used passive construction, predominantly found in scientific and academic writing. As Ludwig AI highlights, it serves to classify subjects based on defined criteria, enhancing clarity and organization. While it can be interchanged with alternatives like "was classified with" or "was grouped with", careful attention should be paid to the context to ensure accuracy and avoid ambiguity. Its primary function is to establish relationships and similarities, especially within structured domains. Given the information provided by Ludwig, this phrase is useful for presenting information in a clear and formal tone, particularly within scientific and academic fields.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

was classified with

Replaces 'categorized' with 'classified', maintaining the passive voice and similar meaning.

was grouped with

Substitutes 'categorized' with 'grouped', emphasizing the act of placing items together.

was associated with

Instead of direct classification, it indicates a connection or relationship.

was labeled as

Focuses on the assignment of a label or designation.

was identified as

Highlights the act of recognizing and categorizing something.

was designated as

Emphasizes a formal or official assignment to a category.

was indexed under

Implies a systematic categorization within an index or database.

was listed with

Focuses on the act of being included in a list or registry.

was sorted into

Highlights the process of sorting items into specific categories.

was filed under

Emphasizes the placement of something within a filing system or organizational structure.

FAQs

How can I use "was categorized with" in a sentence?

Use "was categorized with" to indicate that something has been placed into a specific group or class based on certain characteristics. For instance, "The patient's symptoms "were categorized with" a mild case of the flu".

What are some alternatives to "was categorized with"?

Alternatives include "was classified with", "was grouped with", or "was associated with", depending on the specific context and nuance you want to convey.

Is it correct to say "was categorized as" instead of "was categorized with"?

Both "was categorized as" and "was categorized with" are grammatically correct, but they have slightly different meanings. "Was categorized as" implies a direct identification, while "was categorized with" suggests a grouping or association. For example, "The book "was categorized as" fiction" versus "The book "was categorized with" other bestsellers".

What's the difference between "was categorized with" and "was listed under"?

"Was categorized with" implies that something is grouped based on shared attributes or criteria. "Was listed under", on the other hand, suggests a more formal or structured arrangement, such as in an index or directory. The phrase "was listed under" implies more formal or structured arrangement.