City transport mode shares in Asia, in 2012
The given table compares the proportion of the use of transportation modes in three different cities, Beijing, Delhi, and Seoul, in 2012. In general, it can be seen from the table that private vehicles and buses were popular in the three cities, while taxi was the least preferred to be used as mode of transportation.
Looking into details, private transport was the most preferable transportation to be chosen by people in the three cities, which was in first place in Beijing, used by almost one-third of its population, and in the third place of the list in Delhi and Seoul, each of which used 23%. The next transportation mode was bus, used by more than a quarter of the citizens in the cities.
In addition, although walking was the most commonly chosen to travel in Delhi, it was less popular in the other two cities, only contributing less than 3% to the total. Furthermore, almost 4 out of 10 people in Seoul prefer to transport by train, making the train as the first place in terms of preferred mode of transportation.
In contrast, taxis were nearly never chosen by people in the three cities to travel, which was no more than 6%, and even never to be chosen in Delhi. In addition, cycling was used at 14% in Beijing, but less than 6 out of 100 people in Delhi and Seoul choose this. Moreover, other transportation was the least popular in all cities, only used by less than 5%.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-09-05 | nurullaili69 | 67 | view |
- City transport mode shares in Asia in 2012 45
- The pie charts and table give information about the total value sources of fish imported to the US between 1988 and 2000 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- City transport mode shares in Asia in 2012 67
- City transport mode shares in Asia in 2012 61
- The pie charts and table give information about the total value sources of fish imported to the US between 1988 and 2000 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, if, look, moreover, third, while, in addition, in contrast, in general, in the third place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 7.0 214% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 33.7804878049 145% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 3.97073170732 252% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1149.0 965.302439024 119% => OK
No of words: 249.0 196.424390244 127% => OK
Chars per words: 4.61445783133 4.92477711251 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97237131171 3.73543355544 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68483432439 2.65546596893 101% => OK
Unique words: 112.0 106.607317073 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.449799196787 0.547539520022 82% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 341.1 283.868780488 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.482926829268 828% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.4926829268 120% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 53.9068698524 43.030603864 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.666666667 112.824112599 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.6666666667 22.9334400587 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.7777777778 5.23603664747 244% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.134170420515 0.215688989381 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0737293326599 0.103423049105 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0621196335957 0.0843802449381 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0937647248448 0.15604864568 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0349693833493 0.0819641961636 43% => 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: 14.1 13.2329268293 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 60.99 61.2550243902 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.3012195122 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.75 11.4140731707 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.51 8.06136585366 93% => OK
difficult_words: 40.0 40.7170731707 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 11.4329268293 162% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.9970731707 116% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.