Applied science has generated significant positive impacts in a crime field. Owing to the unconventional mechanisation, some nations have witnessed a marked slump in the proportion of unlawful acts as opposed to antecedent times. This essay will first discuss on how the DNA finger printing, one of the key blessings of modern automation, plays a pivotal role in impeding and addressing misconducts and secondly, the significance of surveillance cameras in cracking down the criminals and precluding the evils from committing heinous crimes.
To begin with, generally speaking, DNA based investigation remains the top most compared to other probes in terms of tackling and deterring barbarous crimes from hardcore criminals. For illustration, in 1999, New York authorities linked a suspect through DNA evidence to at least 22 sexual assaults and robberies which remained a mystery and terrorised the city for a prolonged time despite laying out 15 million dollars for the examination. Likewise, the same authority associated data that was found on a rape victim to a convicted rapist just 5 days before the schedule of his release from the prison. If the said prisoner was set free before the outcome of the investigation, understandably, the offender would have carried out grave crimes. Therefore, it ascertains why DNA finger printing seems instrumental in both solving and halting crimes.
In addition, for many, installing Closed Circuit Television has subjected to a significant drop in wickedness. The majority of law breakers would usually think twice before breaking a house because they feel intimidated of being caught red handed as camera can capture the identity and illegal activities that normally form a solid basis for evidence in the court. Not only would surveillance cameras firmly discourage potential crooks but also they could crack notorious cases. Bombing at Boston Marathon would be an ideal example, where three people died and 264 were injured. Two suspects were identified and convicted, thanks to control cameras. In absence of such valuable products of automation, the case would have got increasingly complicated. Presumably, security cameras prove that they remain effective in combating awful crimes.
In conclusion, it is clear that DNA finger printing and Closed Circuit Television seem entirely worthy because of the positive effect and creation of continuing anxieties among villains.
Essay evaluation report
flaws:
It is not in the IELTS style. the examples are too long. the correct way:
1. introduction
2. Advanced technology can prevent crimes. first, it can track and record people's behaviors. like: CCTV; second, digital ID/password to prevent the access of sensitive areas. like: banking system.
3. Advanced technology can solve crimes. first, topic sentence, for example: DNA... (one sentence is enough, don't need to go details). second, topic sentence, another example.
4. in conclusion
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 9
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 373 350
No. of Characters: 2012 1500
No. of Different Words: 250 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.395 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.394 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.877 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 162 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 129 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 93 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 58 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.312 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.509 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.562 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.279 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.483 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.025 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 117, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ost compared to other probes in terms of tackling and deterring barbarous crimes ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, likewise, second, secondly, so, therefore, at least, in addition, in conclusion, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.3376753507 204% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2059.0 1615.20841683 127% => OK
No of words: 373.0 315.596192385 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.52010723861 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.39467950092 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97676242002 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 252.0 176.041082164 143% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.675603217158 0.561755894193 120% => OK
syllable_count: 640.8 506.74238477 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.3169520662 49.4020404114 140% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.6875 106.682146367 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3125 20.7667163134 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.25 7.06120827912 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.9879759519 226% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0481358998758 0.244688304435 20% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0150714064012 0.084324248473 18% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0278729499699 0.0667982634062 42% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0241745646023 0.151304729494 16% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0212184048343 0.056905535591 37% => 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: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.4159519038 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.75 8.58950901804 125% => OK
difficult_words: 141.0 78.4519038076 180% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.