TPO 52
Based on the given materials, the article as well as the lecture discusses sending people to asteroids, which are massive amounts of rocky and ice-made objects in the solar system. The author states that there are several viable advantages that make these expeditions the best colonization option. That being said, the lecturer provides several ideas to repudiate this claim.
Initially, the writer says that since asteroids are smaller than other planets, they have got lower gravity which helps spaceships to have easier both landing and taking off. However, the speaker explains that having lower gravity will put the project in danger, owing to the fact that low gravity environments cause decreases in both people's bones density and human beings' muscle mass, which result in health problems in the long run.
Second, the author proclaims that there would have been valuable metals in some asteroids, which can be mined and sold to obtain financial benefits. Yet again, the lecturer underscores that considering additional factors, it cannot be true, because not only will mining and transportation processes cost a lot and decrease the mentioned profit but also, whenever those valuable metals are supplied in the market, there is no guarantee to have fixed prices, and the price may fall.
The final point of contention between the reading and the listening passage is how easy is to reach these asteroids. The writer thinks that periodically asteroids come close to the earth and by using this opportunity people can reach the asteroids much more affordable and easier than reaching to other planets. On the other hand, the lecturer explains that although asteroids' orbits make reaching easier, whenever spaceships try to reach these objects, it is really hard for them the return. Actually, the asteroids' orbits are strange, thus, if the asteroids move away from the earth, colonized people should travel further more than when they travel to the Mars.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, may, really, second, so, thus, well, as to, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => 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: 1664.0 1373.03311258 121% => OK
No of words: 315.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28253968254 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45164061358 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 145.348785872 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.609523809524 0.540411800872 113% => OK
syllable_count: 500.4 419.366225166 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 66.9056323217 49.2860985944 136% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.272727273 110.228320801 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.6363636364 21.698381199 132% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.72727272727 7.06452816374 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
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: 17.8 13.3589403974 133% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 53.8541721854 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.94 12.2367328918 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.49 8.42419426049 113% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 63.6247240618 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.