Air purifiers
Both reading and the lecture are about air purifiers. In this set of materials, the writer strongly postulates that air purifiers protect our health from air pollution and provides three types to endorse its idea. On the other hand, the professor states the ineffectiveness of them and gainsays each of the kind mentioned in the article.
First and foremost, the passage begins by asserting the efficacy of HEPA filters. This filter removes allergens from the atmosphere by trapping air pollutants in folded fiber sheets. In contrast, the professor states that particles that are small in size do not get embedded in fiber sheets. Viruses and other harmful chemical particles can escape through filters which are really hazardous for human health. Moreover, they can reproduce in filters and could get released back into the air. Hence, the HEPA filter is not efficient.
Secondly, the speaker states that ozone-generating air purifiers are literally dangerous. When ozone is used in high concentration to remove the foul smell, it reacts with the various body parts, for instance, skin and lungs. As a result, causing great damage to the health. In fact, the effects of ozone are as bad as getting exposed to gasoline. These claims refute the writer's implication about Ozone-generating air purifiers. He describes that ozone is very efficient in removing not only smell but also airborne harmful chemicals by reacting with them. In addition, ozone has a very appealing pleasant smell.
Ultimately, the article wraps its arguments by declaring UV filters. This kind of filter removes toxic microorganisms by reacting directly with air and also, they work very quietly. However, the professor in the listening refutes this point by showing the inaccuracy of the writer that UV filter does not remove allergens and dust particles. Although it improves the quality of air but does not eliminate the scent of perfumes, cigarettes, and other harmful substances. Thus, this filter is also not very productive.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-04-06 | Safa Arshad | 80 | view |
| 2021-01-25 | Safa Arshad | 76 | view |
| 2021-01-11 | talelaldabous | 76 | view |
| 2021-01-02 | bhimsen | 76 | view |
| 2020-12-19 | arun-kum6 | 80 | view |
- Carved stone balls 80
- Rembrandt is the most famous of the seventeenth century Dutch painters However there are doubts whether some paintings attributed to Rembrandt were actually painted by him One such painting is known as Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet The pa 81
- Carved stone balls 70
- Potrait of an elderly woman in a white bonnet 3
- benefits of going green 90
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 242, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: small
...rofessor states that particles that are small in size do not get embedded in fiber sheets. Vi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 373, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...ed to gasoline. These claims refute the writers implication about Ozone-generating air ...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 517, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...this filter is also not very productive.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, moreover, really, second, secondly, so, thus, for instance, in addition, in contrast, in fact, as a result, on the other hand
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 : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1692.0 1373.03311258 123% => OK
No of words: 320.0 270.72406181 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2875 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22948505376 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82117412392 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 145.348785872 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56875 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 522.0 419.366225166 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 13.0662251656 161% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.2428568212 49.2860985944 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 80.5714285714 110.228320801 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.2380952381 21.698381199 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.7619047619 7.06452816374 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.27373068433 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.250515170725 0.272083759551 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0707304449159 0.0996497079465 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107845088276 0.0662205650399 163% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162374860836 0.162205337803 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0967573939696 0.0443174109184 218% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.3589403974 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.81 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 63.6247240618 149% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 242, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: small
...rofessor states that particles that are small in size do not get embedded in fiber sheets. Vi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 373, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...ed to gasoline. These claims refute the writers implication about Ozone-generating air ...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 517, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...this filter is also not very productive.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, moreover, really, second, secondly, so, thus, for instance, in addition, in contrast, in fact, as a result, on the other hand
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 : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1692.0 1373.03311258 123% => OK
No of words: 320.0 270.72406181 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2875 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22948505376 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82117412392 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 145.348785872 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56875 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 522.0 419.366225166 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 13.0662251656 161% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.2428568212 49.2860985944 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 80.5714285714 110.228320801 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.2380952381 21.698381199 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.7619047619 7.06452816374 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.27373068433 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.250515170725 0.272083759551 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0707304449159 0.0996497079465 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107845088276 0.0662205650399 163% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162374860836 0.162205337803 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0967573939696 0.0443174109184 218% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.3589403974 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.81 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 63.6247240618 149% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.