Describe the following process
The chart underneath describes how cutting tools in the Stone age had been developed.
The first tool being 1.4 million yearsago was pretty thin, about 2.5 centimeters wide and 7.5 centimeters long. Both the front and the back of this tool were tough and seemed to be cutted uncarefully. It can be said that those people at that time just picked a rock with sharp side and turned it into a thing serving their purposes.
At that time, people was learning to make things better. As a result, 600000 years from the first tool, there had been a significantly improvement. The back and forth of the new tool looked like a water drop and became more smooth than the old one. Moreover. the side was also cutted much carefully. And not only the shape had been different but also the size had become bigger, probably for cutting larger things such as meat, tree and so on.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 120, Rule ID: A_RB_NN[1]
Message: You used an adverb ('significantly') instead an adjective, or a noun ('improvement') instead of another adjective.
...ars from the first tool, there had been a significantly improvement. The back and forth of the new tool loo...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 250, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Moreover,
...nd became more smooth than the old one. Moreover. the side was also cutted much carefull...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 260, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...more smooth than the old one. Moreover. the side was also cutted much carefully. An...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, look, moreover, so, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 7.0 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 6.8 132% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 14.0 33.7804878049 41% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 715.0 965.302439024 74% => OK
No of words: 156.0 196.424390244 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.58333333333 4.92477711251 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.53411884305 3.73543355544 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.27703099479 2.65546596893 86% => OK
Unique words: 108.0 106.607317073 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.692307692308 0.547539520022 126% => OK
syllable_count: 209.7 283.868780488 74% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.8896882391 43.030603864 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.4444444444 112.824112599 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.3333333333 22.9334400587 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.88888888889 5.23603664747 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => 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: 1.0 4.09268292683 24% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0228118240667 0.215688989381 11% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0109618016799 0.103423049105 11% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0310046572075 0.0843802449381 37% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0328854050397 0.15604864568 21% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0465069858113 0.0819641961636 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.8 13.2329268293 67% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 79.6 61.2550243902 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.4 10.3012195122 62% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 8.99 11.4140731707 79% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.81 8.06136585366 84% => OK
difficult_words: 23.0 40.7170731707 56% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.4329268293 74% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.