The graph below shows US consumers' average annual expenditures on cell phone and residential phone services between 2001 and 2010.
The given line graph illustrates the amount of expenses on mobile phone and residential phone services paid by US users every year in a 10-year period from 2001 to 2010.
It is clear that the chart witnessed two opposite trends. While the cell phone services went up dramatically during the whole period, there was a significant decrease in residential phone services.
In the initial year, almost 700 dollars were paid for residential phone services that was three times more than the amount given to cell phone services with just 200 dollars. From that year, a steeply change happened that make everything different. The expenditures on residential services began to drop rapidly compared to a considerable increase in cell phone services untill 2006 the two figures reached the same amount at about 550 dollars.
In the last year, cell phone services hit the highest point at nearly 800 dollars that was four times more than the first year. In contrast, residential phone services declined by 300 dollars compared to 2001, with 400 dollars.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-11-29 | hollandnguyen | view | |
| 2021-11-29 | hollandnguyen | view | |
| 2021-07-24 | tuongvan | 73 | view |
- The tables give information about the temperatures and hours of daylight in London and Sydney during the same weekend in December 2018 84
- The graph below shows the average number of UK commuters travelling each day by car bus or train between 1970 and 2030 78
- The chart below shows the number of girls per 100 boys enrolled in different levels of school education 69
- The chart below shows global sales of the top five mobile phone brands between 2009 and 2013 78
- The diagram below shows how solar panels can be used to provide electricity for domestic use 61
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 192, Rule ID: A_RB_NN[1]
Message: You used an adverb ('steeply') instead an adjective, or a noun ('change') instead of another adjective.
... with just 200 dollars. From that year, a steeply change happened that make everything different...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 416, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ll 2006 the two figures reached the same amount at about 550 dollars. In the la...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, while, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.48453608247 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 4.92783505155 0% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 5.05154639175 20% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.03092783505 165% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 32.9175257732 21% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 26.3917525773 99% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.85567010309 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 875.0 937.175257732 93% => OK
No of words: 172.0 206.0 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.08720930233 4.54256449028 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.62144681703 3.78020617076 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55921621106 2.54303337028 101% => OK
Unique words: 100.0 127.690721649 78% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.581395348837 0.622605031667 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 262.8 290.88556701 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.41237113402 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 9.13402061856 11% => OK
Article: 3.0 0.824742268041 364% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 1.83505154639 54% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.463917525773 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 1.44329896907 346% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 12.6804123711 63% => 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: 21.0 16.3608247423 128% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 46.6871234925 44.8134815571 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.375 76.5299724578 143% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5 16.8248392259 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.625 4.34317383033 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.29896907216 93% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 2.54639175258 79% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 7.41237113402 40% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.49484536082 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.94845360825 127% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.36137000248 0.216113520407 167% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.162405500469 0.0766984524023 212% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.105333313242 0.0603063233224 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.241781180528 0.12726935374 190% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0400814011411 0.0580467560999 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 8.37731958763 159% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 70.7449484536 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 3.82989690722 230% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 7.45979381443 138% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 8.71597938144 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 7.59969072165 100% => OK
difficult_words: 32.0 41.2886597938 78% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 8.62886597938 133% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 8.54432989691 122% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 8.15463917526 147% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.