The lecture and the reading are both about the efficiency of computerized smart cars. The author of the passage believes that this type of cars can make our commute safer, quicker and cheaper. The lecturer casts doubt on claims made by the author. She thinks the modern car is not effective.
First of all, the author argues that in terms of safety, the smart car is convincing. According to the article, there will be the advance device on it, which can help to indicate other cars' as well as obstacles' location and go around from crash. This specific argument is challenged by the professor. She claims that even with cutting-edge cars will occur an accident. Added to this, she points out that sensors of the car will occasionally break.
Secondly, the writer suggests that smart cars can avoid traffic congestions. It is said in the reading that these automobiles can be controlled in remote without accidents, even at high speed. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by mentioning the history of driving convenience. She elaborates on this by bringing up the point that since the amount of cars increases, it is difficult to prevent traffic and climbing up the speed.
Finally, the author posits that it can be less expensive than traditional cars. The article mentions that as smart cars are programmed to be driven directly without fails, drivers do not waste their money to reparation. On the contrary, the speaker's position is defending the point that devices of this automobile are extremely expensive. She notes that sensor which shows the distance between cars costs very expensive. Furthermore, as long as smart car breaks, much money will spend to repair it.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 195, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...our commute safer, quicker and cheaper. The lecturer casts doubt on claims made by ...
^^^
Line 4, column 500, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ks, much money will spend to repair it.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, well, as well as, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1398.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 280.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99285714286 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09062348924 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61689955201 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.571428571429 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 419.4 419.366225166 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.0624390838 49.2860985944 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 77.6666666667 110.228320801 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.5555555556 21.698381199 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.44444444444 7.06452816374 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.193997355801 0.272083759551 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0625364720285 0.0996497079465 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0381298819023 0.0662205650399 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12184868232 0.162205337803 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0340297629897 0.0443174109184 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.9 13.3589403974 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 53.8541721854 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 11.0289183223 73% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.