astroid, muscle, earth, moon, mining, gravity, metal, gold
In this set of material, both the author of the reading passage and the lecturer are discussing asteroids colonization and pores and cons of human living on them. Although the author declares that several reasons are supporting the author's idea, the professor casts doubts about the author's claim. She believes it cannot be practical, and there are serious downsides. In what follows, the reasons for both the author and the lecturer will be substantiated.
Firstly, both the reading and talk have a debate on low gravity on the asteroid. According to the passage, it is said that space crafts would not be pulled down strongly when they are landing on the asteroid’s surface due to low gravity, and it prevents from damage a spaceship. On the other hand, the professor explains that low gravity has a few risks. It causes muscle mass reduction and decreases bones density. Thus, it leads to health problems for human in the low gravity circumstances.
Secondly, the author off the passage acclaims that men have access to large numbers of mining valuable metals such as gold and platinum that are comparatively rare on Earth. In contrast, the professor proclaims that it does not have a certain picture. Funds required to colonization and mining is at a high level. It can be costly, and there is no guaranty that it will remain the same. Moreover, mining and bring that kind of metals result in the lower market price of metals.
Finally, the author announces that a few of the asteroids can get nearer to Earth than Moon. However, the professor notifies that it is not easy to return from asteroids to Earth due to their unusual orbit. Therefore getting back to Earth would be challengeable.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 233, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...that several reasons are supporting the authors idea, the professor casts doubts about ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 208, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ds to Earth due to their unusual orbit. Therefore getting back to Earth would be challeng...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, in contrast, kind of, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1417.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 289.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90311418685 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67130268739 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 145.348785872 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.543252595156 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 430.2 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.1206045626 49.2860985944 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.3529411765 110.228320801 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 21.698381199 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.94117647059 7.06452816374 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.104353446267 0.272083759551 38% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0287495796538 0.0996497079465 29% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0447675950654 0.0662205650399 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0636282915827 0.162205337803 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0542533602293 0.0443174109184 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.1 13.3589403974 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 53.8541721854 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.84 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.36 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.