integrated 47
Both the reading and the lecture discuss the capability of powered flight in pterosaurs. In the reading section, the writer contends that ptersaurs were not capable of powered flight and provides three reasons for support; however, the professor casts doubts on reading points by indicating that they were capable of powered flight.
First of all, the writer claims that since modern reptiles are cold-blooded, pterosaurs were cold-blooded too, so they had not enough energy to fly; in contrast, the professor rejects this notion by stating that
Moreover, the reading sections holds the view that ptersaurs were too heavy to be able to flag their wings fast; as a result, they could not stay for a long time; on the contrary, ptersaurs had low weight despite their large body.
In addition, the writer mentions that fossilized bones shows that ptersaurs's back leg muscles were not enough strong to be able to take off from the ground; conversely, the professor indicates that ptersaurs used their four legs to push themselves and they did not just use their back legs but birds just use their back legs to walk on the ground.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 212, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ssor rejects this notion by stating that Moreover, the reading sections holds the...
^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'conversely', 'first', 'however', 'moreover', 'so', 'in addition', 'in contrast', 'as a result', 'first of all', 'on the contrary']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.234449760766 0.261695866417 90% => OK
Verbs: 0.157894736842 0.158904122519 99% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0813397129187 0.0723426182421 112% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0861244019139 0.0435111971325 198% => Less adverbs wanted.
Pronouns: 0.0478468899522 0.0277247811725 173% => OK
Prepositions: 0.129186602871 0.128828473217 100% => OK
Participles: 0.0143540669856 0.0370669169778 39% => Some participles wanted.
Conjunctions: 2.44242799168 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0334928229665 0.0208969081088 160% => OK
Particles: 0.00478468899522 0.00154638098197 309% => OK
Determiners: 0.0909090909091 0.128158765124 71% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.00478468899522 0.0158828679856 30% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00478468899522 0.0114777025283 42% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1131.0 1645.83664459 69% => OK
No of words: 189.0 271.125827815 70% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.98412698413 6.08160592843 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.70779275107 4.04852973271 92% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.343915343915 0.374372842146 92% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.26455026455 0.287516216867 92% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.15873015873 0.187439937562 85% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.116402116402 0.113142543107 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44242799168 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 110.0 145.348785872 76% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.582010582011 0.539623497131 108% => OK
Word variations: 53.3402026202 53.8517498576 99% => OK
How many sentences: 4.0 13.0529801325 31% => More sentences wanted.
Sentence length: 47.25 21.7502111507 217% => Sentence lengths are too long.
Sentence length SD: 131.450561049 49.3711431718 266% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 282.75 132.220823453 214% => Less chars per sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 47.25 21.7502111507 217% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 2.75 0.878197800319 313% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.39072847682 29% => OK
Readability: 73.705026455 50.5018328374 146% => OK
Elegance: 1.29508196721 1.90840788429 68% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.549887131256 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.341586143471 0.142949733639 239% => Sentence is so close to another sentence.
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0468781889155 0.0787303798458 60% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.928152070061 0.631733273073 147% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.108083838175 0.139662658121 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.266732575781 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.103435571967 0% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.263707188162 0.414875509568 64% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0580548836947 0.0530846634433 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.40443939384 0% => The content is off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0528353158467 0% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 4.33554083885 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.26048565121 23% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 0.0 3.49668874172 0% => More positive topic words wanted.
Negative topic words: 3.0 3.62251655629 83% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 3.1766004415 31% => OK
Total topic words: 4.0 10.2958057395 39% => More topic words wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Minimum 200 words wanted.
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.