If I want to use lead to, does it always need to use being as shown below.
less number of points lead to missing edges being occurred, are recognized using proximity analysis.
-
3Is that intended to be a complete sentence? It doesn't make sense as it stands. I'd guess at [Using] a lower number of points will lead to a number of edges being missed; this will be picked up on by the use of proximity analysis. Lead to may be followed by a noun phrase or a structure containing an -ing-form: ...will lead to disaster // ...wil lead to some edges being missed.– Edwin AshworthNov 29, 2012 at 19:28
-
@Edwin Ashworth: thank you for the comments. Actually I wanted to write the following meaning with the term lead to. "The cases where missing edges occur due to less number of points are recognized using proximity analysis".– gnpNov 29, 2012 at 20:49
-
2"Fewer points" or "a smaller number of points" is correct. => "Cases in which there are missing edges occur because fewer points are recognized using proximity analysis".– user21497Nov 29, 2012 at 23:01
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
One possible way to phrase your sentence(the complete one posted in the comments) using "lead to" is:
Proximity analysis recognizes cases in which fewer points lead to missing edges.
There are obviously many other ways to rephrase the sentence such as:
Fewer points lead to cases where edges are missed; however, these are recognized by proximity analysis.
I personally prefer the former over the latter.
