A glance at the provided table illustrates the information about the variation of mobile phone features used by people from 2006 to 2010 in percentage. In general, it is clearly apparent that all features showed an upward pattern in utilization except making calls. However, making calls was the most feature harnessed by the people.
Looking in more detail from the table, during the period, all people made calls through their mobile phone although the percentage decreased by 1% in 2010. Beside making calls, they liked to send and receive text message year by year with the utilization from 73% to 79% of the total use. Additionally, the use of mobile phone for taking pictures also gained popularity which increased from 66% to 76% during 4 years of period. Interestingly, although it used under 50%, the entertainment features such as playing games and music also reported an increase by 24% and 14%, respectively. Finally, although the data was not applicable in the beginning of the period, the phone property for searching the internet and recording video used by people at 41% and 9% of each in 2008 but rose significantly in 2010 to 73% and 35%.
- The maps below show a science park in 2008 and the same park today Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The bar chart below shows different methods of waste disposal in four cities Toronto Madrid Kuala Lumpur and Amman 78
- Students today can easily access information online so libraries are no longer necessary Do you agree or disagree 73
- The table below gives information about UK independent films 73
- The chart below shows information about subway systems in three major European cities Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main information and making comparisons 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 823, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e significantly in 2010 to 73% and 35%.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, if, look, so, in general, such as
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: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 33.7804878049 115% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 965.0 965.302439024 100% => OK
No of words: 195.0 196.424390244 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94871794872 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.73687570622 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72781952162 2.65546596893 103% => OK
Unique words: 121.0 106.607317073 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.620512820513 0.547539520022 113% => OK
syllable_count: 292.5 283.868780488 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.4926829268 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.283179651 43.030603864 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.625 112.824112599 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.375 22.9334400587 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.75 5.23603664747 148% => OK
Paragraphs: 2.0 3.83414634146 52% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.33935661005 0.215688989381 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.137106816794 0.103423049105 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0854128721486 0.0843802449381 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.271348732516 0.15604864568 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00673887825844 0.0819641961636 8% => 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: 55.58 61.2550243902 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.3012195122 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 11.4140731707 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.06136585366 108% => OK
difficult_words: 48.0 40.7170731707 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.9970731707 105% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.