The argument states about the investigation on recalled food by a pet company, in which all the chemicals found are approved for use in pet food. The pet company tested some samples and concluded that the recalled food was not responsible for the vomiting, lethargy and other illness in the pets who consumed the food. The conclusion drawn in the argument is based unwarranted assumptions, two of which can be stated as followed.
First of all, the description about the quantity of samples tested by the pet food company was not provided in argument. It is possible, the pet food company has tested only those samples in which found chemicals are approved ones for use in pet food. Perhaps, other samples had chemical which are not to be part of pet food. Testing large number of samples, could have given more accurate result. This makes the conclusion, vulnerable for accusation.
Secondly, the variation in composition of pet food is not given. There could be chances of changing in composition of pet food over the time. This could lead to generation of chemicals in pet food which are not healthy for food and not approved to be used in pet food. May be pet who suffered from illness may have consumed this food.
To sum up, the conclusion drawn is based on many unwarranted assumption. More information about the quantity of samples, could have add logical point to the evidence. The detailed research about variation of composition, would have strengthen the argument.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 251 350
No. of Characters: 1196 1500
No. of Different Words: 111 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.98 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.765 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.594 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 74 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 67 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 50 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 24 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.733 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.444 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.267 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.397 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.579 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.126 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 320, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ness in the pets who consumed the food. The conclusion drawn in the argument is bas...
^^^
Line 5, column 211, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n of chemicals in pet food which are not healthy for food and not approved to be ...
^^
Line 7, column 90, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...unwarranted assumption. More information about the quantity of samples, could hav...
^^
Line 7, column 134, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'added'.
Suggestion: added
...out the quantity of samples, could have add logical point to the evidence. The deta...
^^^
Line 7, column 234, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'strengthened'.
Suggestion: strengthened
...ut variation of composition, would have strengthen the argument.
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, may, second, secondly, so, then, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 11.1786427146 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 6.0 28.8173652695 21% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 55.5748502994 68% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1235.0 2260.96107784 55% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 251.0 441.139720559 57% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.9203187251 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98032404683 4.56307096286 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68974762862 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 114.0 204.123752495 56% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.454183266932 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 381.6 705.55239521 54% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.7180466022 57.8364921388 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 82.3333333333 119.503703932 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7333333333 23.324526521 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.2 5.70786347227 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => 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: 0.511582082955 0.218282227539 234% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.20462023067 0.0743258471296 275% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.181922955148 0.0701772020484 259% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.33021048728 0.128457276422 257% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.192288702366 0.0628817314937 306% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.1 14.3799401198 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 48.3550499002 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 12.197005988 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.96 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.76 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 98.500998004 54% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.