In the preceding argument, the author state that the crime rate in Amburg city has increased, the conclusion of the argument is based on the following premises. Firstly, he states that Amuburg's police has begun patrols on bicycles in order to mitigate the crime rate but the solution did not work. Secondly, he states that they have to install high light system, and the solution was effective to decrease the crime rate in Belleville city. Then, by this solution the city will revitalize again. Hence, it may seem plausible at first glance. However, careful scrutiny sheds light on plethora of assumptions that could undermine the value of the argument.
To begin with, the author states that the crime rate has increased recently in Amburg city. On one hand, he readily assumes that the both cities are the same and the same solution is mandatory will work to mitigate the crime rate. But we do not have evidence that using high light system has worked in good way and how it works in Blleville city and perhaps they used another system augments the effectiveness of the high light system such as network of cameras system. In deed, the source of difference could be the cause of success that led to mitigate crime rate. Moreover, he fails to provide information about what types of vandalism the both cities have faced . Thus, without these evidences the argument remains unwarranted.
Secondly, the fallacy of the argument also lies in using undefined language that did not reflect significant results, such as using "decline". Thus, he fails to provide specific and precise information to describe how much the decline was and how much the real crime rate was. Perhaps the crime rate was 65 percent and after using the high light system became 60 percent. Consequently, is it significant mitigation? So, the author has to be precise to boost his case.
Thirdly, he readily states without warrant that the police has begun patrols on bicycles did not mitigate the crime rate. But from where he concluded this assumption what type of evidences he used. Perhaps the real solution is this one, but it needs more time to be effective or perhaps needs more number of police men and restricted observation. Furthermore, how he concluded that by mitigating the crime rate people will return to Amburg city. We would need evidences about this assumption. It might the real cause is not the crime rate may be low infrastructure or low level of services in this city. In deed, without concrete evidences the argument remains reckless.
In conclusion, the argument fails to mention one key factor. Namely, all the previous assumptions are equivocal. Hence, without complete information and evidences the argument is unsubstantiated and opened to debate
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 459 350
No. of Characters: 2230 1500
No. of Different Words: 195 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.629 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.858 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.525 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 151 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 119 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 82 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.371 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.741 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.29 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.459 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.124 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 666, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... of vandalism the both cities have faced . Thus, without these evidences the argum...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, thus, as to, in conclusion, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 28.8173652695 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2308.0 2260.96107784 102% => OK
No of words: 459.0 441.139720559 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02832244009 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62863751936 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69212251383 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 204.123752495 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.444444444444 0.468620217663 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 736.2 705.55239521 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 4.22255489022 237% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.0949006938 57.8364921388 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.4814814815 119.503703932 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 23.324526521 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.77777777778 5.70786347227 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0967516869064 0.218282227539 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0254438262144 0.0743258471296 34% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.034040849953 0.0701772020484 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0562723439031 0.128457276422 44% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0399052273573 0.0628817314937 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.8 14.3799401198 75% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.75 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 98.500998004 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.