The diagram below shows the development of cutting tools in the Stone Age. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant
The given picture demonstrates the enhancement of primitive cutting tools. Overall, in over 0.6 million years, the tools witnessed a significant change in both size and shape. Additionally, this enhancement of cutting tools also contributes to the increase of effectiveness while utilizing.
Regarding tool A which dates back to 1.4 million years ago, its size was measured and recorded at approximately 8 cm in length and 4 cm in width. Looking from the front view, its shape resembles natural rock and has a rough surface. Turning to the side view, the estimation of its thickness was about 2.5 cm. In the back, the large bottom part was perhaps used to hold the tool and the pointy tip was a part that was used with cutting purpose.
In terms of tool B, after a period of 0.6 million years the cutting tool observed a significant modification with the increase in size ( about 11 cm in length and 6 in width). From the front view, the shape of tool B was altered which was identical to the shape of teardrop and it had a flatter surface. In the side view, the cutting tool was shrunk to advance the sharpness. In the back, tool B was renovated to be larger than its predecessor.
- Many people think technological devices such as smart phones tablets and mobile phones bring more disadvantages than advantages To what extent do you agree or disagree 67
- The diagram shows how rainwater is collected for the use of drinking water in an Australian town Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features of the graph and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The diagram below shows the floor plan of a public library 20 years ago and how it looks now 78
- The maps below shows university sports courts in 1990 and now Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The bar chart below shows the popularity of well known Instagram accounts in 2011 and 2021 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 11
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 135, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t modification with the increase in size about 11 cm in length and 6 in width. Fr...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, look, regarding, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 7.0 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 973.0 965.302439024 101% => OK
No of words: 210.0 196.424390244 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.63333333333 4.92477711251 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.80675409584 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72571112442 2.65546596893 103% => OK
Unique words: 105.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.547539520022 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 288.9 283.868780488 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 3.36585365854 238% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 8.94146341463 123% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.5598638676 43.030603864 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.4545454545 112.824112599 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0909090909 22.9334400587 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.72727272727 5.23603664747 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => 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 : 3.0 1.13902439024 263% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0925565950695 0.215688989381 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0440122329752 0.103423049105 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0297257059119 0.0843802449381 35% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0750005703285 0.15604864568 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0269322138706 0.0819641961636 33% => 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: 9.9 13.2329268293 75% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 61.2550243902 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 10.3012195122 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.57 11.4140731707 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.44 8.06136585366 92% => OK
difficult_words: 38.0 40.7170731707 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.4329268293 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.