The maps below show a science park in 2008 and the same park today.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The two maps present the science park in its current plan and its layout in 2008.
Overall, the park is now more accessible and is easier to navigate since the current set-up includes multiple transport stations and a different network of road. There is also a greater focus on scientific, educational venues, all added at the expense of both greeneries and administrative sites.
Previously, a considerable part of the park was covered with the grass and woods all around the area. The car park right in the center had connection trails to business units, with the reception abutting the offices in the north and with the cyber security located south of the site. The IT centre, though, was positioned between the road that run through the middle of the area and the railway at the south end.
At present, the cyber security point extends towards the midway at the expense of the car park. In the northern part of the science park, the patch under the grass is now the space for the research and development building, with the reception being turned into the university hub. Still, the most significant change southward is the railway station opening, creating additional connection points to the cyber security, car park as well as the innovation centre that replaced the IT one. The roads are now complemented not only with the cycle lanes but also with a bus stop east of the road, yet there are no significant alterations to the woodland spots so as to the offices and business units.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 285, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'The' or 'IT'?
Suggestion: The; IT
...ber security located south of the site. The IT centre, though, was positioned between ...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 292, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'centres'?
Suggestion: centres
...urity located south of the site. The IT centre, though, was positioned between the roa...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 476, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'IT'?
Suggestion: the; IT
... as the innovation centre that replaced the IT one. The roads are now complemented not...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 655, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...icant alterations to the woodland spots so as to the offices and business units.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, so, still, well, as to, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 7.0 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 6.8 162% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 3.97073170732 227% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1244.0 965.302439024 129% => OK
No of words: 257.0 196.424390244 131% => OK
Chars per words: 4.84046692607 4.92477711251 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00390054096 3.73543355544 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57133977098 2.65546596893 97% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 106.607317073 135% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.560311284047 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 373.5 283.868780488 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.33902439024 207% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.4926829268 111% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.0296491015 43.030603864 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.4 112.824112599 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7 22.9334400587 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.9 5.23603664747 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 1.69756097561 236% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.126485493605 0.215688989381 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0551304939574 0.103423049105 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0511487109344 0.0843802449381 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0919655307093 0.15604864568 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0540859784067 0.0819641961636 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.2329268293 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 61.2550243902 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.3012195122 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.09 11.4140731707 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.06136585366 104% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 40.7170731707 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.9970731707 109% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.