tpo 35 smart cars that could drive themselves
The material discusses the benefits of the computerized smart cars. While the reading claims that smart cars could make driving safer, qicker and cost-effective, the listening challenges this and mentions that it is not clear the highlt technonogical cars could produce all these benefits.
First, the author states that smart cars could increase the safety of road. On the other hand, the professor opposes this and posits that smart cars still get some accidents. The lecturer explains that the technologically advanced equipments could fail occisionally, since smart cars could be more tightly packed, more cars will be involved in an accident. The professor concludes that accidents will be more serious and there are little reasons that smart cars could save people's lives.
Second, the writer points out that smart cars could increase the highways speed and reduce the commute time. On the contrary, the professor refutes this and contends that smart cars will be more convenient, so they will convince more people to drive. The lecturer adds that increase the number of drivers will add more cars in the roads, so it could increase the traffic congestion. The lecturer points out that makes drivers could not get the advantage of highly speed cars.
Third, the reading says that smart cars could save drivers' money. Conversely, the professor contradicts this and states that smart cars have global position technology that allow them to direct their destinations is very expensive. In addition to that the speaker mentions that smart cars have other costs, such as sensors that keep a car at a specific distance from the car infront of it. furthermore, the lecturer adds that repairing these cars is more expensive than the mentainance of the conventional cars.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 92, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... increase the highways speed and reduce the commute time. On the contrary, the professor re...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, first, furthermore, if, second, so, still, third, while, in addition, such as, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 5.04856512141 297% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 18.0 30.3222958057 59% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1489.0 1373.03311258 108% => OK
No of words: 286.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20629370629 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57561096103 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 430.2 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.8175717246 49.2860985944 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.357142857 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4285714286 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.92857142857 7.06452816374 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 4.33554083885 254% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.365242552543 0.272083759551 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.15545860983 0.0996497079465 156% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0674610146704 0.0662205650399 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.260953375658 0.162205337803 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0322380942871 0.0443174109184 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.