The table below shows the number of visitors to four museums in the city Carlsburg over 10 years from 1995 to 2004.
The table presents the quantity of visitors to various museums in Carlsburg city within the 10-year period between 1995 and 2004. Overall, Modern Art Gallery was the most popular museum throughout the entire period, while Van Buergen Museum showed the lowest attendance statistics.
According to the data provided, the number of visitors to the National Museum of Art was constantly growing from 568,000 people in 1995 to its maximum of over 1 million in 2002, but later a slight decline to 901,000 can be seen by 2004. As for the Modern Art Gallery, its indicator of attendants was characterized by an almost four-time increase by 2004 and reached its peak of around 2 million people. The reverse situation can be noted for Van Buergen Museum whose rate of visitors moderately went down to 123,000 in 1997 and afterwards climbed to 200,000 in 1999. However, in the 2000s this museum saw a fluctuating number of visitors with its highest 260,000 in 2004. And finally, the index of Renaissance Museum showed a considerable surge from 324,000 visitors to its top value of 520,000 in 2004.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-08-02 | Nurbakyt2oo1 | 80 | view |
- The best way to improve health is to do exercise To what extent do you agree 67
- Technology is becoming increasingly prevalent in the world today In the not too distant future technology will completely replace the teacher in the classroom Do you agree or disagree with this statement 78
- The line graph below gives information about the number of visitors to three London museums between June and September 2013 84
- The graph below shows the percentage of part time workers in each country of the United Kingdom in 1980 and 2010 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 81
- The chart below shows the expenditure of two countries on consumer goods in 2010 56
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 577, Rule ID: IN_1990s[1]
Message: The article is probably missing here: 'in the 2000s'.
Suggestion: in the 2000s
...ds climbed to 200,000 in 1999. However, in 2000s this museum saw a fluctuating number of...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, however, while, as for
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 1.00243902439 200% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 33.7804878049 112% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 904.0 965.302439024 94% => OK
No of words: 182.0 196.424390244 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.96703296703 4.92477711251 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.67297393991 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61593862449 2.65546596893 99% => OK
Unique words: 110.0 106.607317073 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.604395604396 0.547539520022 110% => OK
syllable_count: 254.7 283.868780488 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 26.0 22.4926829268 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.647940472 43.030603864 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.142857143 112.824112599 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0 22.9334400587 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.14285714286 5.23603664747 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 2.0 3.83414634146 52% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.352762982693 0.215688989381 164% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.167371422146 0.103423049105 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.11992361429 0.0843802449381 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.279629924186 0.15604864568 179% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.053178407478 0.0819641961636 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 13.2329268293 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 62.01 61.2550243902 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 11.4140731707 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.06136585366 116% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 40.7170731707 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.4329268293 114% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.9970731707 113% => 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.