The line chart above compares waste output in tonnes among 3 companies A, B and C from 2000 to 2005.
It can be seen from the graph that both companies A and B witnessed the downward trend of waste output over 15-year period). In contrast, the amount of waste of company C increased rapidly.
In 2000, company C produced 4 tonnes while companies A and B only created an average of around 12 tonnes and 8 tonnes respectively). Over the next 5 years company B reached a peak of 10tonnes and company C rose slightly 2 while company A fell significantly to approximate 11 tonnes by 2005.
From 2005 to 2015, the waste of company A and B went down sharply whereas company C went up steadily. In particular, the figure of waste for company A decreased from 9 tonnes by 2010 to 8 tonnes by 2015. Meanwhile, company B plunged from 7 tonnes in 2010 to 3 tonnes in 2015. It is clear to see that, from having the highest waste products index, company A became into the one that had second smallest amounts and the company waste least products is probably B. In contrast, company C produced the largest waste by 2015.
The line chart above compares waste output in tonnes among 3 companies A, B and C from 2000 to 2005.
It can be seen from the graph that both companies A and B witnessed the downward trend of waste output over 15-year period). In contrast, the amount of waste of company C increased rapidly.
In 2000, company C produced 4 tonnes while companies A and B only created an average of around 12 tonnes and 8 tonnes respectively). Over the next 5 years company B reached a peak of 10tonnes and company C rose slightly 2 while company A fell significantly to approximate 11 tonnes by 2005.
From 2005 to 2015, the waste of company A and B went down sharply whereas company C went up steadily. In particular, the figure of waste for company A decreased from 9 tonnes by 2010 to 8 tonnes by 2015. Meanwhile, company B plunged from 7 tonnes in 2010 to 3 tonnes in 2015. It is clear to see that, from having the highest waste products index, company A became into the one that had second smallest amounts and the company waste least products is probably B. In contrast, company C produced the largest waste by 2015.
- The graph below shows the amounts of waste produced by three companies over a period of 15 years 67
- The line chart above gives information on the figure for British city workers travelling every day to work by the three common kinds of transport from 1970 to 2030.It is clear from the graph that the quickly rising number of people who went and will go to 73
- The line chart above gives us difference between world food and oil costs from 2000 to 2011. Generally, both food and oil prices increased steadily at the beginning of the period and picked up from 2008 to 2009. But only food price reaches top in 2011, ot 22
- The pie charts above depict the median ages of Yemeni and Italian citizens in 2000 and predictions in 2050.It is well-defined from the charts that kids, teenagers and adults under 60 years old account for most of Yemen’s population both in 2000 and 2050 73
- The given graph illustrates how much waste is created by three companies over the course of 15 years beginning at 2000.Looking at the graph, it is immediately obvious that both companies A and B witnessed the downward trend of waste output over 15-year pe 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 10, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'charts'.
Suggestion: charts
The line chart above compares waste output in tonnes a...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, second, whereas, while, in contrast, in particular
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: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 33.7804878049 112% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 905.0 965.302439024 94% => OK
No of words: 204.0 196.424390244 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.4362745098 4.92477711251 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.77926670891 3.73543355544 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60546017472 2.65546596893 98% => OK
Unique words: 103.0 106.607317073 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.504901960784 0.547539520022 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 264.6 283.868780488 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => 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: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.7800206292 43.030603864 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.5 112.824112599 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4 22.9334400587 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.4 5.23603664747 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 1.13902439024 615% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.09268292683 24% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.616851909745 0.215688989381 286% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.296912936588 0.103423049105 287% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.182361098001 0.0843802449381 216% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.469241151979 0.15604864568 301% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.19453794645 0.0819641961636 237% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.7 13.2329268293 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 76.56 61.2550243902 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 10.3012195122 74% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 8.47 11.4140731707 74% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.26 8.06136585366 90% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 40.7170731707 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.