Recently, the phenomenon of public transportation has sparked an ongoing controversy, which inevitably leads to a moot question" What is the advantages and disadvantages of improving public transport?". Whereas it is a widely held view that public transport is highly beneficial, I will discuss controversial aspects of that throughout this essay.
From the social standpoint, different types of public transport are bound up inextricably with the society's well-being, which indicates they lead to both transportation accessibility and individual's convenience. As a well-known example, a longitudinal study conducted by eminent scientists in 2016 demonstrates the relationship between commuting time and workers efficiency as well as an exponential increase in on time schedules. Researchers, nevertheless, paid heed to other methods of transportation and transportation reforms alike. Consequently, my empirical evidence presented thus far supports the contention that the likelihood of easy to access transportation is correlated positively with not only public transport but also revolutionized transportation methods.
Within the realm of socioeconomics, without the slightest doubt, cost efficiency attribute to taxi and bus system, in that it would come down to fuel and time consumption. A salient example of such attribution is subway network which is a cause for concern since it was mistaken to take the urban area for granted. Had there been a paradigm shift earlier, scholars might have had the opportunity to pinpoint private car usage problems. Hardly had they confined their attention to transportation rules and even traffic crisis. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the pivotal role of the public interest.
To conclude, as for myself, as the saying goes" All's well that ends well, " after analyzing what elaborated above, I firmly believe that developing and investing the public methods of transportation is highly beneficial.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, hence, if, nevertheless, so, thus, well, whereas, as for, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 6.10837438424 49% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 8.36945812808 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 31.9359605911 119% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 5.75862068966 260% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1685.0 1207.87684729 140% => OK
No of words: 289.0 242.827586207 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.83044982699 5.00649968141 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.52751153134 2.71678728327 130% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 139.433497537 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.657439446367 0.580463131201 113% => OK
syllable_count: 513.9 379.143842365 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.5024630542 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.5690261447 50.4703680194 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.416666667 104.977214359 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0833333333 20.9669160288 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.75 7.25397266985 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.143810343416 0.242375264174 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0523354370491 0.0925447433944 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0410090219181 0.071462118173 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0855968418784 0.151781067708 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0413529812441 0.0609392437508 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.1 12.6369458128 143% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 53.1260098522 57% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.9458128079 137% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.83 11.5310837438 146% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.78 8.32886699507 129% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 55.0591133005 198% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 9.94827586207 176% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.3980295567 112% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 10.5123152709 171% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.