R.robustus was the active hunter of dinosaur
The reading casts doubt about the claims of some researcher that R.robustus hunted dinosaur and provides three reasons in support of the claim. However, the professor explains that there are problems with these arguments and refute’s each of the author’s reason.
First, the article states that the R.robustus’s size was similar to that of a pet cat. With this size, it is not possible for R.robustus to prey the dinosaur. However, the lecturer opposes this idea by explaining that R.robustus size was enough for hunting the baby dinosaurs. He also mentions that R.robustus size was more than twice than that of baby dinosaur. This proves that R.robustus could prey the small dinosaur.
Second, the reading claims that the leg of R.robustus was too short to prey. But the professor rejects the article’s claim by stating that the Tasmanio demo has short leg, yet it can run fifteen kilometers per hour. Therefore, it was possible for R.robustus to hunt, though it had small legs.
Finally, the reading states that there was not teeth marks on the bone of dinosaur, which found inside the stomach of R.robustus. However, the professor contends this claim by saying that the R.robustus did not use back teeth for chewing and it could swallow big piece of meat. This explains why there was no teeth marks on the bones of dinosaur that found inside the stomach of R.robustus.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, second, so, therefore, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1166.0 1373.03311258 85% => OK
No of words: 231.0 270.72406181 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04761904762 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89854898053 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66690559451 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 121.0 145.348785872 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.52380952381 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 333.9 419.366225166 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => 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: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.8505151453 49.2860985944 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.6923076923 110.228320801 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7692307692 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.23076923077 7.06452816374 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.326605601939 0.272083759551 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.149360099885 0.0996497079465 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0796689191006 0.0662205650399 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199403899501 0.162205337803 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0858980984729 0.0443174109184 194% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 13.3589403974 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 71.14 53.8541721854 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 11.0289183223 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.71 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.42 8.42419426049 88% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 63.6247240618 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.