The bar chart compares various modes of daily commute including train, car, tube, and bus in three different time spans.
The bar chart compares various modes of daily commute including train, car, tube, and bus in three different time spans.
Overall, it is crystal clear that far more people used their vehicle in 2000 compared with 1960. The proportion of bus commuters, on the other hand, saw a downward trend from 1960 to 2000. The percentage of train and tube commuters experienced some fluctuations in the period shown.
In 1960, far more people are attracted to use bus for their daily commute with nearly 38 %, and this followed by tube and train passengers with 27% and 18% respectively. The figure for car travelers, by contrast, accounted for the lowest percentage constituting slightly above 5%. In 1980, the percentage of train and car commuters increased considerably and reached approximately 27% and 22%, while the figure for tube and bus travelers went down.
The percentage of car commuters and tube travelers had experienced a significant and moderate increase respectively by 2000, and the former reached its peak making roughly 37% and the latter accounted for 25%. However, 15% and 22% of people selected bus and train for their travel, which is far lower than their percentage in 1980.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-04-21 | Mohammad Khaleghi Esfahani | 84 | view |
- The illustration demonstrates the various stages undertaken in order to produce leather products. 78
- The diagram demonstrates various stages undertaken in order to design a trade show over the course of two years. 56
- The pie charts demonstrate the volume of energy generated from six various resources in a specific nation over the course of a two separate year. 22
- The two layouts demonstrate the changes which had happened in road access to a city hospital by 2010. 67
- It is true to say that the usage of fast food could contribute to devastating health problems 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, so, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 6.8 221% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 24.0 33.7804878049 71% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 996.0 965.302439024 103% => OK
No of words: 196.0 196.424390244 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08163265306 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.74165738677 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73996027494 2.65546596893 103% => OK
Unique words: 116.0 106.607317073 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.591836734694 0.547539520022 108% => OK
syllable_count: 287.1 283.868780488 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.482926829268 621% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.0924829375 43.030603864 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.666666667 112.824112599 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7777777778 22.9334400587 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.55555555556 5.23603664747 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.385592631412 0.215688989381 179% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.190895616564 0.103423049105 185% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.290231663108 0.0843802449381 344% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.349702403171 0.15604864568 224% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.376579451076 0.0819641961636 459% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.2329268293 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 61.2550243902 96% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.3012195122 100% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 11.4140731707 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.06136585366 101% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 40.7170731707 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.