The graphs below show the size of ozone hole over the Antarctic and the production of three ozone-damaging gases from 1980 to 2000. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The graphs depict the changes in the size of ozone hole in Antarctic and three different types of destructive gases damaging the aforesaid ozone hole during 1980 and 2000. Moreover, the amounts of production of damaging gases are measured in metric tonnes.
Overall speaking, the size of Antarctic ozone hole rockets in the questioned 20 years. As for the harmful gases to the ozone hole, while the production of freon sees a steep decline, the emission of both NO2 and H2O2 rise a bit during the said period.
From 1980 to 1985, the amount of emission of Freon was largest among three types of destructive gases and reached its highest point (200K) before 1985. Meanwhile, the amount of the production of both NO2 and H2O2 did not change rapidly, which were around 100K and 18K respectively. During the same period, the ozone hole of Antarctic slightly rose from below 50K square kilometres to about 70.
After 1985, the amount of production of freon witnessed a plummet after reaching its highest point (200K) and finally dropped to 20K. However, both the production of NO2 and H2O2 saw an obvious increase. The emission of NO2 substituted the Freon to become the most produced gases among them in around 1993, while the H2O2 was still the least produced. However, the emission of H2O2 climbed above the amount of Freon after around 1996. With the ups and downs of three different harmful gases, the size of ozone hole firstly steeply rose to almost 200K in 1990 from around 70K in 1985 and then slightly climbed to around 240 in 2000.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, still, then, while, as for
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 13.1623246493 30% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 7.85571142285 0% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 7.30460921844 14% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 3.0 24.0651302605 12% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 41.998997996 136% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1277.0 1615.20841683 79% => OK
No of words: 266.0 315.596192385 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.8007518797 5.12529762239 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03850299372 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.32921663987 2.80592935109 83% => OK
Unique words: 123.0 176.041082164 70% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.462406015038 0.561755894193 82% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 371.7 506.74238477 73% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.60771543086 87% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 5.43587174349 0% => OK
Article: 11.0 2.52805611222 435% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.8832833262 49.4020404114 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.416666667 106.682146367 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1666666667 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.16666666667 7.06120827912 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.67935871743 35% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.269300369892 0.244688304435 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.110249474685 0.084324248473 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.104568747121 0.0667982634062 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.21180652192 0.151304729494 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.106545070137 0.056905535591 187% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.0946893788 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 50.2224549098 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.3001002004 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.56 12.4159519038 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.64 8.58950901804 89% => OK
difficult_words: 49.0 78.4519038076 62% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.