At the first glance, the author of the argument seems very convincing in his/her idea conveyed to the readers. The argument makes some assumptions that due to the deleterious effects of the manned space flight, a safer and cheaper alternative of using unmanned space probes is a viable option. Is man the reason behind the risk of safety in the flight? What are the reasons behind the success of an unmanned space probe? To answer these questions, the argument has mentioned a few assumptions either implicitly or explicitly whose flaws will be looked upon.
Firstly, the argument posits that the manned space flight is costly and dangerous. It makes no mention about the reasons behind the cost and risk involved in the manned space flight. Maybe , the high expenditure involved could be attributed to the material used in the making of the flight. Usage of materials which are abundantly found and are as effective of the costly materials used now, these new budget friendly materials could substitute the extravagant materials used presently. Secondly, the argument doesn't provide any statistics or data about the manned space flight accidents. If such evidence is mentioned, it will give a better insight into why it has been termed risky.
In addition to this, the author comes to a conclusion of using unmanned space probes over manned space flight based on the success scenarios witnessed over a few years. Having unmanned space robes means to automate every single space flight existing and this increases the overall expenditure. Also, besides quoting only about the success of the unmanned space probes, the reasons behind the success should be mentioned which will consolidate the author's stand. What if the reasons for the success lie behind the design and the technology used in the unmanned space robes which is missing in the manned space flight? What if the risk behind the manned space flight isn't due to man and is due to the lack of proper equipments and facilities in the manned space flight?
In conclusion, answering the above questions will help us understand which can be a viable option. Drawing a conclusion based on the recent success doesn't imply it is a viable option. The argument, as of now lacks a few evidences and is inherently flawed.
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-essays/following-opinion-was-provided-l…
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 383 350
No. of Characters: 1855 1500
No. of Different Words: 172 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.424 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.843 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.496 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 142 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 86 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 64 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 41 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.158 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.293 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.474 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.368 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.536 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.128 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 189, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...volved in the manned space flight. Maybe , the high expenditure involved could be ...
^^
Line 3, column 511, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... used presently. Secondly, the argument doesnt provide any statistics or data about th...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 666, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...the risk behind the manned space flight isnt due to man and is due to the lack of pr...
^^^^
Line 7, column 149, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... conclusion based on the recent success doesnt imply it is a viable option. The argume...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, firstly, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, in addition, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 28.8173652695 45% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1899.0 2260.96107784 84% => OK
No of words: 379.0 441.139720559 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.01055408971 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41224685777 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55495146888 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.46437994723 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 589.5 705.55239521 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.8880705443 57.8364921388 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.9473684211 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9473684211 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.21052631579 5.70786347227 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.347029454477 0.218282227539 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124373436085 0.0743258471296 167% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0870584174213 0.0701772020484 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202748492341 0.128457276422 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0884867216834 0.0628817314937 141% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.3799401198 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.16 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.