TPO 36
When it comes to whether the method "cloud seeding" can protect crops from the damage of hail, the author in reading passage believes it could be an effective way, by reasoning three evidences which are contradicted by the lecturer in listening material.
First, the author points that the idea was attested in the laboratory experiments, in which the researchers produced snow by adding silver iodide to cold water vapor. The lecturer argues that it may be true under the experiment environment, while in real life it can prevent any forms of percipitation, such as snow, rain, hail, that is also damaged. Moreover, when it is used in some low-lever percipitation area, it can cause a severe drought. So this method is unreliable.
Second, the author states that the successful experience in urban areas of Asian proves that it should also be an effective way in farms of America. The lecturer, on the other hand, said that it cannot be repeated, since the air of urban Asian includes high air polutions. These polution particals can interact with these chemical materials and may lead to the successful result. While the air is clean in United States, so it may not occure especially in fields and farms. Therefore, this evidence is not convincing either.
Finally, the author reasons that some local studies suggests it is effective in central United States where cloud seeding is used. However, the lecturer refutes that this data is not convincing either, because the area where damage decreased is not only where the cloud seeding took place, but also the east, south or north of America. It cannot be assured whether cloud seeding really benefits to these areas.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-09-20 | HideAPumpkin | 75 | view |
| 2022-09-02 | Allenwlh | 70 | view |
| 2021-09-08 | whiteflower | 80 | view |
| 2021-08-17 | Mizanur | 40 | view |
| 2021-03-22 | alibenvari | 70 | view |
Comments
?
?
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, really, second, so, therefore, while, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1416.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 279.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0752688172 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08696624509 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64166216677 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5770609319 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 443.7 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 1.25165562914 479% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.5336832312 49.2860985944 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.923076923 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4615384615 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.15384615385 7.06452816374 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => 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: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.09 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 63.6247240618 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 10.7273730684 182% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.