"Burning mirror"
This material addresses the question of a weapon, so-called "burning mirror", which might have /had/ been used by Greeks against Romans in ancient times. The reading passage suggests that there is little possibility that such a weapon existed. The lecturer, on the other hand, refutes this information by stating that the mentioned weapon might be created.
To begin with, the reading passage highlights that it is not feasible that ancient Greeks could manufacture one huge mirror, since at that time they were not able to do that technologically. Meanwhile, the professor casts doubt on this and argues that Greeks were able to produce a lot of small sheets of copper instead, and that experiment showed that it is real given the knowledge they had in the field of mathematics.
Additionally, the article posits that it is unrealistic to use such a weapon since you need a lot of time to fire a wooden boat, and the boats should not move during that time. However, the professor advocates a different approach and provides the following details. Namely, she mentions that there is a material called pitch, which was used in ancient times in the construction of boats, and that material can be burned in seconds.
Finally, the author invites attention to the fact that there was no need in new weapon since Greeks had flaming arrows with the help of which the boats could be put on fire. This goes counter with the information in the listening passage, according to which, it was hard to use effectively arrows because, unlike the mirror, Romans were familiar with it /them/ and could easily disarm it /them/.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, however, if, second, so, while, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 12.0772626932 157% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1353.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 273.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.95604395604 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66749172118 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 145.348785872 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538461538462 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 409.5 419.366225166 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 21.2450331126 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 47.2859387133 49.2860985944 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.3 110.228320801 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.3 21.698381199 126% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.3 7.06452816374 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0592928744427 0.272083759551 22% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0230478332828 0.0996497079465 23% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0313184008306 0.0662205650399 47% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0367990343939 0.162205337803 23% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0146506423738 0.0443174109184 33% => 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: 15.6 13.3589403974 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 53.8541721854 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 11.0289183223 114% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.498013245 122% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => 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: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.