Soon technology will provide smart cars: cars that virtually drive themselves. A computer in the car determines the speed and route to the desired destination. The computer is in continuous contact with a global positioning system and other technologies that will provide extremely accurate information about the location of the car, other cars on the road, congestion, accidents, and so forth. The human driver will be little more than a passenger. Smart cars promise to make driving safer, quicker, and less expensive. First of all, smart cars will prevent many accidents, thereby saving lives. The cars will be equipped with a variety of sensors that very accurately detect cars and other obstacles in their path, and they will have automatic programs that control braking and turning to avoid collisions. Given the hundreds of accidents that occur on highways daily, it is clear that humans do a poor job of avoiding accidents and that computer control would be a great improvement. Second, with the wide use of smart cars, traffic problems will practically disappear. These computer-controlled cars can follow each other closely, even at high speeds. This ability will result in increased highway speeds. Today commuting by car can take hours a day. So the increased speed of smart cars will be a great benefit, welcomed by the many people who commute by car. Finally, smart cars will bring a reduction in the costs of driving. Because smart cars are programmed to drive the most direct routes, car owners will have to spend less money on repairs and replacement parts. Expensive items such as brakes, tires, and transmissions will last much longer in smart cars than in other cars.
Even if computerized smart cars meet all the technological expectations set for them, it’s not clear that they’d produce the benefits some have predicted.
Smart cars will still get into some accidents. After all, even the most technologically advanced devices fail occasionally. And since the smart car technology will allow cars to be more tightly packed together on the roads, these accidents will be pileups that involve many more cars and so be much worse than accidents that occur today. Overall, there is little reason to believe that smart cars will save lives or reduce the number of injuries in automobile accidents.
Second, let’s talk about the potential to increase highway speeds and therefore decrease commuting time. Well, history has consistently shown that when some driving convenience is introduced, more and more people decide to drive because they expect an easier driving experience. But then the increased number of drivers in the case of smart cars of the future would not decrease commuting time. This is because the traffic congestion caused by the additional cars on the road would not allow the drivers to take advantage of the smart cars’ potential for higher speeds.
And finally, it’s not reasonable to expect that smart cars will save drivers money. The global positioning technology required to direct smart cars to their desired destinations is very expensive, and smart cars will need other costly technologies too, such as sensors that control how far a smart car stays behind the car in front of it. Moreover, the advanced technology of smart cars will make repairs to them more expensive than repairs on conventional automobiles. These new expenses will more than offset the expected savings on the repair and replacement of traditional mechanical car parts.
The article is about smart cars which are cars virtually drive themselves. It explains three advantages that these cars provide. They promise to make driving safer, quicker, and less expensive. However, the professor thinks that even if this cars meet the expectation, it is not cleear that they will achieve these benifits.
First, the reading says that smart cars will prevent many accidents, thereby saving lives. Their sensors will help in detecting cars and other obstacles accurately, and a computer program will control braking and turning to avoid collusion. In response, the professor explains that this cars do not have the ability to avoid accidents hundred percent. Moreover, their accidents involve many cars which will cause more damage than an ordenary accident.
Second, according to the author, smart cars help in solving traffic problems, and people will spend less time in commuting. In contrast, the lecture says that traffic is not going to dissapear because when drvers find driving is more convenient, there will be more cars on the street which means that they are going to spend more time to commute.
Finally, the article illustrates how smart cars have low cost of driving. It explains that due to their computer program they drive in the most direct routes. According to the professor, this cars are more expensive. They have an expensive sensors, they need costly technology, and their repairs need a lot of money.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 335, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a hundred'.
Suggestion: a hundred
...not have the ability to avoid accidents hundred percent. Moreover, their accidents invo...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 240, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'sensor'?
Suggestion: sensor
... more expensive. They have an expensive sensors, they need costly technology, and their...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, moreover, second, so, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 19.0 30.3222958057 63% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1212.0 1373.03311258 88% => OK
No of words: 235.0 270.72406181 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15744680851 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91531732006 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.43809363817 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 127.0 145.348785872 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.540425531915 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 357.3 419.366225166 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.9941263193 49.2860985944 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.5714285714 110.228320801 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7857142857 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.42857142857 7.06452816374 63% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.281363142364 0.272083759551 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113419036763 0.0996497079465 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0686049679174 0.0662205650399 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180700485143 0.162205337803 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.052835593145 0.0443174109184 119% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 53.8541721854 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.66 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.