When it comes to tasks that require creativity, some people prefer to think independently so that they can avoid others' interference, while some prefer to boost their efficiency by collaborating with others. And from my experience, I would like to work with others to solve the problems that demands creative methods.
First and foremost, working together can eliminate some unnecessary but critical mistakes. When many people get involved into one task, the problems tend to be considered for more than on time, thus making crosscheck possible. There was an well-known structure engineer who designed the structure of a library. The structure of building was really advanced, employing prestressed concrete and large span steel structures to magnify the interior space. However, without working together with the architect, the engineer forgot the loading of the books, the basic elements in the library. If the engineer could work together with the architects or other specialists, this fault could be totally avoided.
Moreover, cooperation can inspire creativity, especially when various specialists participate in a task. Because when people with different background and knowledge work together, they will offer suggestions in terms of multiple dimensions. In addition, since people have distinct way of thinking, updating thinking methods for individuals can be achieved. For example, recently, the machine learning is quite popular. However, to apply this technique to practical use, specialist in computer science need to cooperate with others from specific profession,like speech recognition. Without the assistance from linguistic experts, the algorithms will function randomly, wasting time and funding.
Last but not the least, it's true that there are many prominent scientists that proposed, but the current system of science has been virtually completed, making innovation more difficulty. Therefore, we urgently need joint efforts to make breakthrough because individuals' ability is limited. Not only do we need the broad horizons offered by various specialists mentioned previously, but we also need more talents equipped with proficiency in one particular field. Some electronic devices, such as iPhone, can illustrate the importance of cooperation between many experts. The amount of work of one single part could be too heavy a burden for on engineer, hindering the creativity. But with the joint efforts from many experts, the work can be shared and creativity can be achieved.
In conclusion, working together can help us avoid mistakes, consider many perspectives and boost the efficiency of innovation.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 238, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...s making crosscheck possible. There was an well-known structure engineer who desig...
^^
Line 5, column 556, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , like
...ate with others from specific profession,like speech recognition. Without the assista...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 361, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... horizons offered by various specialists mentioned previously, but we also need m...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, moreover, really, so, therefore, thus, well, while, for example, in addition, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 9.8082437276 184% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 43.0788530466 42% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 52.1666666667 107% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.0752688172 161% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2245.0 1977.66487455 114% => OK
No of words: 394.0 407.700716846 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.69796954315 4.8611393121 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45527027702 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96028862927 2.67179642975 111% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 212.727598566 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.598984771574 0.524837075471 114% => OK
syllable_count: 684.0 618.680645161 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 8.0 3.08781362007 259% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 6.0 3.51792114695 171% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.2198441321 48.9658058833 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.904761905 100.406767564 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7619047619 20.6045352989 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.2380952381 5.45110844103 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.188647084353 0.236089414692 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0584674153293 0.076458572812 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0691340626887 0.0737576698707 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111577847574 0.150856017488 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00977840640388 0.0645574589148 15% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 11.7677419355 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 58.1214874552 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.78 10.9000537634 145% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.7 8.01818996416 121% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 86.8835125448 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.