The table below provides statistics on several major metro (MRT) systems around the world.
Given is the table comparing main metro systems of various cities in the world in terms of age, scale, and carrying capacity per annum.
A glance at the information reveals a striking fact that the more recently inaugurated MRT systems are generally much shorter in length than the older ones. Annual carrying capabilities, however, vary from cities to cities.
Regarding London and Paris, the two oldest metro systems built in the 19th century have the longest railways among the reported cities. Nevertheless, the former almost doubles the latter in terms of total length, at 1100 km compared with 594 km. In stark contrast, Paris can carry more people per year, with 850 million, than London, with 548 million.
Meanwhile, Tokyo and Washington DC underground systems were both finished before the 1930s of the 20th century, with pretty similar scales, respectively expanding for 149 km and 114 km. Yet, the Asian city has the by far most powerful annual carrying capacity among the listed cities, with 1434 million passengers. Whereas, Washington DC can serve a mere 70 million people per year, which is approximately 20 times less than Tokyo.
The remainder two cities of Kyoto and Los Angeles own the youngest and shortest MRT systems with lowest yearly carrying powers.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 119, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: shorter
...ugurated MRT systems are generally much shorter in length than the older ones. Annual carrying ca...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 93, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'with the lowest'.
Suggestion: with the lowest
...n the youngest and shortest MRT systems with lowest yearly carrying powers.
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, nevertheless, regarding, whereas, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 1.00243902439 200% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 1.0 5.60731707317 18% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 33.7804878049 77% => OK
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: 1081.0 965.302439024 112% => OK
No of words: 209.0 196.424390244 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17224880383 4.92477711251 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.80221413058 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5078343855 2.65546596893 94% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 106.607317073 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.665071770335 0.547539520022 121% => OK
syllable_count: 303.3 283.868780488 107% => 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: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.9626434081 43.030603864 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.1 112.824112599 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9 22.9334400587 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.8 5.23603664747 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 3.83414634146 130% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.108159183095 0.215688989381 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0453658203074 0.103423049105 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0569474056237 0.0843802449381 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0773876992225 0.15604864568 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0555896384301 0.0819641961636 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.2329268293 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 61.2550243902 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 11.4140731707 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.92 8.06136585366 123% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 40.7170731707 172% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.