robots are superior to astronauts
The lecturer refutes all three arguments presented in the reading passage about, use of robots in space explorations. The reading claims that the robots are superior to human astronauts as they are more productive, efficient in a dangerous environment, and are well suited for repeated works. However, the professor challenges all the arguments and presented a counter-argument for each of the assertions.
To begin with, the professor contradicts the claim that robots are productive as robots presumably work faster because they never get tired. He states that, during the voyage to Mars, the main investigator Steve Squares argues that a human astronaut can do things much faster than a robot in less than a minute. Besides that, a robot still needs instructions and controls by engineers and technicians on Earth. So we cannot say that they are productive.
Secondly, the reading suggests that robots can be sent to work in a dangerous environment as they don't get injured. The tutor, on the contrary, says that any broken part or injury for the robotic machine can lead to malfunctioning and it may stop working. He adds that, although robots need no food or water, they need a power supply and maintenance for it's well functioning. Therefore any scarcity of these basic needs is detrimental for the robot. Moreover, exposure to high heat can burn out the metal parts of a robot and can destroy it.
Finally, the passage posits that robots are well suited for repetitive works that do not require superior intelligence. The professor denies this by contending that robots cannot suggest creative solutions to problems like humans as they are machines. Any minor errors in the coding of robots will eventually cause the repetition of errors that needs a human technician to solve them. As a result, complex missions to space definitely needs human astronauts rather than a robot.
- Question Summarise the points made in the lecture being sure to explain how they case doubt on specific points made in the reading passage In an effort to encourage ecologically sustainable forestry practices an international organization started issuing 3
- 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 80
- Young people nowadays do not give enough time to helping their communities 95
- Large numbers of dinosaur fossils have been discovered in deposits on Alaska s North Slope a region that today experiences an extremely cold arctic climate One hundred million years ago when those dinosaurs were alive the environment of the North Slope wa 85
- Technology has made children less creative than they were in the past 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 99, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...work in a dangerous environment as they dont get injured. The tutor, on the contrary...
^^^^
Line 5, column 377, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...d maintenance for its well functioning. Therefore any scarcity of these basic needs is de...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, finally, however, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, well, as a result, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1581.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 310.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83516824549 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 145.348785872 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564516129032 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 489.6 419.366225166 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.3283326782 49.2860985944 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.8125 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.375 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.1875 7.06452816374 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.354707259655 0.272083759551 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.115238162969 0.0996497079465 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0776945871541 0.0662205650399 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.223896739386 0.162205337803 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0516940987757 0.0443174109184 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.91 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 63.6247240618 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.