It is clear that changing the pest control company might be a better choice than using the same company that could not help to control the pest, but the author's assumption is not strong enough to lead to the conclusion. The damage cost is useful information to help to analyze the problem; however, the author's assumption has holes in logic and is missing important information.
The first issue in the author's claim is that how the author knows that the damages were from only pests. There are many possible aspects that could have happened in the warehouse. Damages in the warehouse might have occurred from other animals such as rats, crows, and so on. These animals could have destroyed the food production of the company. They might have entered the warehouse when there was no human inside, so the happened damages were not from the pest. Furthermore, the quantity of production in the warehouse might have been different. In Palm City, the company might have stocked a lot of food, yet they might have kept a little food in Wintervale; therefore, it is obvious that the damages should have happened more in Palm City than in Wintervale. Thus, the damages might not have been from the pest control company as in the author's evidence but from other possibilities.
Additionally, the author should give more detailed information about what types of food were kept in both warehouses. This data is necessary for the accuracy of the author's evidence. If the food in both warehouses is different, the damages will also be not the same. Different food has different food's enemies. For example, houses made of wood will be destroyed by termites but not worms, while in a fruit garden, gardeners are afraid of other insects such as ants, worms, and so on. This shows that if the warehouse in Pam City and in Wintervale stocked different types of food, the damages from pest can not use the same measurement. Consequently, the author's statement will not be used as evidence due to the data's inaccuracy.
Reduced pest damage by using services from other companies can really help to increase profits. Nevertheless, the author's assumption is unclear and too weak to be used as evidence for the conclusion.
- The line graph below gives information about the number of visitors to three London museums between June and September 2013.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 73
- The graph shows the worldwide market of the mobile phone market for sales in the years 2009 and 2013. 78
- The diagram below show the site of a school in 2004 and the plan for change to the school site in 2024.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparison where relevant 67
- the pie charts show the online shopping sales for retail sectors in Canada in 2005 and 2010. 67
- The graph below shows the quantities of goods transported in the UK between 1974 and 2002 by four different modes of transport.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant 67
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 375 350
No. of Characters: 1791 1500
No. of Different Words: 163 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.401 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.776 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.495 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 114 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 95 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 63 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.737 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.043 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.356 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.533 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.096 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 154, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...d not help to control the pest, but the authors assumption is not strong enough to lead...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 304, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...lp to analyze the problem; however, the authors assumption has holes in logic and is mi...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 655, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...the same measurement. Consequently, the authors statement will not be used as evidence ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 115, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... to increase profits. Nevertheless, the authors assumption is unclear and too weak to b...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, furthermore, however, if, nevertheless, really, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 28.8173652695 49% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1835.0 2260.96107784 81% => OK
No of words: 375.0 441.139720559 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.89333333333 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40055868397 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60296719576 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.448 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 576.9 705.55239521 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.1202857551 57.8364921388 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.5789473684 119.503703932 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7368421053 23.324526521 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.73684210526 5.70786347227 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.20758483034 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.191743875549 0.218282227539 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0660231588359 0.0743258471296 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0630238557165 0.0701772020484 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125115545241 0.128457276422 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0264233756921 0.0628817314937 42% => 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: 11.5 14.3799401198 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.3550499002 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.08 12.5979740519 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.57 8.32208582834 91% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 98.500998004 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.