This bar chart shows the number of private cars, in millions, of different cities from 1950 to 2000.
Write a report
The given graph compares five cities named London, Beijing, Tokyo, New York City and Los Angeles in terms of number of private cars in the period of 50 years, from 1950.
It is noticeable that of all the cities, the number of private cars in London were the highest during the period. Meanwhile, Los Angeles saw the most significant increase in the number of cars after 50 years.
In 1950, the number of private cars in London was the highest with 1.5 million vehicles. This figure rose gradually in the following 30 years, at 2 million in 1960, around 2.8 million in 1970 and 3 million in 1980. After that, the number of private cars in London remained stable until the year 2000. In Tokyo, there were 0.5 millions cars in 1950, and it tripled twenty years later. This figure grew to 2 million in 1980. Then private cars in Tokyo saw a slight decline in the rest of the period.
Regarding the three remaining cities, all saw increases in the number of private vehicles. At the beginning of the given period, Beijing had the least private cars in the three cities, at about 0.1 million while it was ten times higher in New York City. Los Angeles saw a sharp growth in the amount of private cars, from 0.5 million at the beginning to six times higher at the end of the period. Meanwhile, In Beijing and New York city, these figures were the same in 2000, at 2.5 million.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-07-29 | chathurika2008@gmail.com | 73 | view |
- The diagram below show the life cycle of a species of large fish called salmon Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparison when relevant 73
- Carbon cycle
- Water cycle 61
- The chart below gives information about Istanbul Promo plus sales 2007 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
- The diagram below shows the process of canning of fish Write a report for a university lecturer describing the process below 40
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, regarding, then, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 33.7804878049 157% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1130.0 965.302439024 117% => OK
No of words: 251.0 196.424390244 128% => OK
Chars per words: 4.50199203187 4.92477711251 91% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98032404683 3.73543355544 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.15719301194 2.65546596893 81% => OK
Unique words: 115.0 106.607317073 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.458167330677 0.547539520022 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 324.0 283.868780488 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 1.53170731707 261% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 12.0 3.36585365854 357% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 8.94146341463 145% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.3593555324 43.030603864 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.9230769231 112.824112599 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3076923077 22.9334400587 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.0 5.23603664747 38% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 3.70975609756 189% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.317183668871 0.215688989381 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135294199842 0.103423049105 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0554399379836 0.0843802449381 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.208254303517 0.15604864568 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.072872425361 0.0819641961636 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.4 13.2329268293 71% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 77.57 61.2550243902 127% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 10.3012195122 70% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 8.82 11.4140731707 77% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.97 8.06136585366 86% => OK
difficult_words: 38.0 40.7170731707 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.0658536585 63% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.