The graph below shows the spending on research into renewable sources of energy in four countries between 1975 to 2000. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main feature and make comparisons where relevant.
The given line chart illustrates the expenditure of individual on research about renewable energy in Switzerland, Denmark, Spain, The UK from 1975 to 2000.
Overall, the Swiss had been spending the highest amount on energy research, whereas the lowest money invested by the UK over the period.
From 1975 to 1980, citizen of Switzerland spent on research increased significantly from nothing to $2 per person and this trend incessants till the end, which made up $5 per person in 2000. Switzerland followed by Denmark, expenditure on energy witnessed a sharp go up in 1980, constituted just above $1 per person. This amount, around $3.5 per person, rocketed in 2000, after declining marginally to a little over $1 per person from 1980 to 1990.
However,trends fluctuated for remain two countries. Approximately $1 per person spent by both countries in 1980, before a moderate decreasing for Spain and the UK, which account for $1 and almost half respectively. These trends ended below $1 per person in 2000, after fluctuating over the periods.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 100, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... increased significantly from nothing to per person and this trend incessants til...
^^
Line 5, column 166, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d incessants till the end, which made up per person in 2000. Switzerland followed...
^^
Line 5, column 298, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rp go up in 1980, constituted just above per person. This amount, around .5 per p...
^^
Line 5, column 408, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...er declining marginally to a little over per person from 1980 to 1990. However...
^^
Line 7, column 8, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , trends
...per person from 1980 to 1990. However,trends fluctuated for remain two countries. Ap...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 66, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... for remain two countries. Approximately per person spent by both countries in 19...
^^
Line 7, column 180, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... for Spain and the UK, which account for and almost half respectively. These tren...
^^
Line 7, column 236, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...f respectively. These trends ended below per person in 2000, after fluctuating ov...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, so, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 1.0 7.0 14% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 867.0 965.302439024 90% => OK
No of words: 163.0 196.424390244 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.31901840491 4.92477711251 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.57311423478 3.73543355544 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90143189642 2.65546596893 109% => OK
Unique words: 100.0 106.607317073 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.613496932515 0.547539520022 112% => OK
syllable_count: 246.6 283.868780488 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.114634146341 0% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.643072903 43.030603864 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.375 112.824112599 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.375 22.9334400587 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.0 5.23603664747 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 1.69756097561 471% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.105993951299 0.215688989381 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0534072710551 0.103423049105 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0426760023762 0.0843802449381 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0808540135338 0.15604864568 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0388481300516 0.0819641961636 47% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.2329268293 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 61.2550243902 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 11.4140731707 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.06136585366 105% => OK
difficult_words: 40.0 40.7170731707 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.