The graph below shows the average time spent by four car manufacturers to produce vehicles at their US factories.
The line chart illustrates how many hours being spent by four different car brandings to produce vehicles in the US from 1998 to 2005.
It is evident that all car manufacturers witnessed a downward trend over the period. While Ford and General Motor showed a minor fluctuation in the average hours to produce cars, the figure for Toyota and Honda experienced the most significant fluctuation. Additionally, Toyota and Honda observed a similar data in the number of hours to produce cars in some years.
In 1998, General Motor had the highest amount of time to produce vehicles among the three car manufacturers, reporting just 32 hours. However, this figure gradually declined to reach 28 hours in 2000. Subsequently, over the next five years, it only takes General Motor 22 hours to produce per car in 2005. Meanwhile, Ford spent 28 hours to produce per car in 1998. Thereafter, it saw a sharp increase to around 31 hours by the year 2001. Moreover, there was a substantial drop in time spending to produce cars for Company B as it reached an impressive low of only under 22 hours by the end of the examined period.
Looking at other car brandings, at the beginning of the period, Toyota and Honda produced per car only 22 hours, which subsequently fluctuated steadily to about 22 hours by the year 2001. The number of hours to produce cars of both car manufacturers rose slightly and recahed a same point, at 24 hours in the next year. At the end of the period, Toyota and Honda showed a fluctuation in the time spending to produce cars and they reached only 20 hours.
- The diagram below shows how a biofuel called ethanol is produced Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
- The pie charts below show the greenhouse gas emissions for last year by sector for Australia and New Zealand Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 56
- The graph below gives information on the numbers of participants for different activities at one social centre in Melbourne Australia for the period 2000 to 2020 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons w 73
- The pie charts show the size of classes in primary schools in four states in Australia in 2010 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The map shows the changes to a residence hall between 2010 and the present 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, look, moreover, so, while
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 : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 47.0 33.7804878049 139% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1298.0 965.302439024 134% => OK
No of words: 276.0 196.424390244 141% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.70289855072 4.92477711251 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 3.73543355544 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68378250065 2.65546596893 101% => OK
Unique words: 137.0 106.607317073 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496376811594 0.547539520022 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 387.0 283.868780488 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 1.53170731707 261% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 8.94146341463 145% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.6704172616 43.030603864 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.8461538462 112.824112599 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2307692308 22.9334400587 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.92307692308 5.23603664747 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 3.70975609756 189% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.280720964722 0.215688989381 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112160072503 0.103423049105 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.064583640576 0.0843802449381 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.189674571207 0.15604864568 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0374534894062 0.0819641961636 46% => 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: 11.3 13.2329268293 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 61.2550243902 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.3012195122 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.98 11.4140731707 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.65 8.06136585366 95% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 40.7170731707 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.