The charts below give information about the number of train passengers and the percentage of trains running on time from 2000 to 2009 in Japan.
The first line chart presents data about train commuters between 2000 and 2009 and the second chart shows the comparison between the punctuality of trains and its target in the ten-year period.
Overall, despite a slight increase in the number of train passenger, the number fluctuated in different years. As for punctuality, while there was a dip in certain year, the Japanese train lines managed to hit the target in 2009.
Starting at 36 millions in 2000, the number of passengers taking trains increased steadily to a record high at more than 46 millions. Interestingly, there was a dip in 2003 at 36 millions. After 2005, train commuters was on a downhill to about 40 millions.
From 2000 to 2004, the percentages of trains that were punctual were on the rise, from 92% to 96%, and hitting the target for the first time in 2002. Afterwards, punctuality were lower than the standard, dropping steeply to only 92% in 2006. However, as soon as it hit the lowest point, the punctuality rate began to recover,, reaching the target again in 2005. By 2009, 97% of train lines were punctual.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-01-17 | lollipop423 | 79 | view |
- Higher education could be funded in three ways All costs paid by government all costs paid by students or students paying all costs through a government loan What are the advantages of these choices 73
- The line graph shows the percentage of different age groups of cinema visitors in a particular country 78
- The charts below give information about the number of train passengers and the percentage of trains running on time from 2000 to 2009 in Japan 79
- The chart illustrates the consumption of three kinds of fast food by teenagers in Mauritius from 1985 to 2015 78
- The line graph shows the percentage of different age groups of cinema visitors in a particular country 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 325, Rule ID: DOUBLE_PUNCTUATION
Message: Two consecutive commas
Suggestion: ,
...t, the punctuality rate began to recover,, reaching the target again in 2005. By 2...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, second, so, while, as for
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => 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: 910.0 965.302439024 94% => OK
No of words: 188.0 196.424390244 96% => OK
Chars per words: 4.84042553191 4.92477711251 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.70287850203 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62214081498 2.65546596893 99% => OK
Unique words: 105.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558510638298 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 247.5 283.868780488 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.07073170732 374% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.4926829268 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.5848597566 43.030603864 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.0 112.824112599 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8 22.9334400587 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5 5.23603664747 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 1.13902439024 263% => Less 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: 0.317566691748 0.215688989381 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120267741754 0.103423049105 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0875504251836 0.0843802449381 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.187075903238 0.15604864568 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0382572089591 0.0819641961636 47% => 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: 10.8 13.2329268293 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 78.59 61.2550243902 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.8 10.3012195122 66% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.79 11.4140731707 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.8 8.06136585366 97% => OK
difficult_words: 39.0 40.7170731707 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.9970731707 84% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.