Practice 04
The reading and listening materials have a debate on the cause of the Eocene warming. The writer comes up with three hypotheses, which are all contradicted by the following lecture.
Firstly, the writer claims that the warming might be caused by changes in the ocean currents. However, the speaker casts doubt on it by giving the computer model of the currents. It shows that even the currents started flowing in new directions, they could only transport relatively limited heat, which was much smaller than the heat needed to cause warming. As a result, the ocean current theory does not work.
Secondly, the author argues that the discovery of magnetic particles in a clay layer proves that the comet striking was the origin of the Eocene warming, while the lecture views this issue from an opposite angle. In accordance with the professor, there is a new finding proposing that the magnetic particles come from the primitive one-celled organisms, a kind of bacteria. If that is the case, the clay layer is not able to become the evidence of the comet striking, which means the comet theory collapses.
Thirdly, the passage states that the release of methane gave rise to the Eocene warming. In contrast, according to the professor, this claim does not hold water due to the problem of timing. After the start of methane escaping, it should take thousands of years for the gas to build up and create the greenhouse effect. Correspondingly, the Eocene warming should happen in thousands of years after the escape of methane, but the geological data indicates that they appeared at the same time. So, the small accumulation of methane could not form the warming.
To sum up, the writer’s statements are totally refuted by the professor, and more conceivable theory is needed to explain the Eocene warming.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, while, as to, in contrast, kind of, as a result, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 30.3222958057 145% => 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: 1520.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 303.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01650165017 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17215713816 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62295066008 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.554455445545 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 463.5 419.366225166 111% => 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: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.6913364709 49.2860985944 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.333333333 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2 21.698381199 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 7.06452816374 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.8 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 63.6247240618 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.