The picture illustrates the evolution of the cutting instrument during the Stone Age between 1.4 million and 0.8 million years ago.
Overall, It is clear that the later design had seen vast improvements in the size, shape so that it could become a more effective cutting tool.
To begin with, the front view shows that Tool A is resembled a natural stone, suggesting a little crafting was done. Whereas Tool A is relatively primitive with a rough surface and blunt edges, therefore, the smooth edges and a pointed end of Tool B are noticeably more efficient as a cutting instrument.
In addition, one of the main differences between the tools can be seen in the side view diagram. Tool A was irregular, in contrast, Tool B takes the shape of a water drop with a sharp edge running across the tool. Finally, the back view identifies undoubtedly that Tool A is not only more rudimentary but is also smaller than Tool B.
- The diagram below shows the development of cutting tools in the Stone Age 84
- The picture below shows how a hot balloon works Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features 67
- The picture below shows how a hot balloon works Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features 67
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, if, so, therefore, whereas, as to, in addition, in contrast, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 1.00243902439 200% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 16.0 33.7804878049 47% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 4.0 3.97073170732 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 759.0 965.302439024 79% => OK
No of words: 162.0 196.424390244 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.68518518519 4.92477711251 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.56762134501 3.73543355544 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66080889544 2.65546596893 100% => OK
Unique words: 102.0 106.607317073 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.62962962963 0.547539520022 115% => OK
syllable_count: 236.7 283.868780488 83% => 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: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => 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: 23.0 22.4926829268 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 26.9587742712 43.030603864 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.428571429 112.824112599 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1428571429 22.9334400587 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.4285714286 5.23603664747 256% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => 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: 0.305406490689 0.215688989381 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.129867343557 0.103423049105 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0258275521237 0.0843802449381 31% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.161480695437 0.15604864568 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0411587893351 0.0819641961636 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.2329268293 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 61.2550243902 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.22 11.4140731707 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.06136585366 100% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 40.7170731707 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.4329268293 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.9970731707 102% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => 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.