The table displays trends concerning the amounts of fast food consumed in Melbourne. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant
The table illustrates the comparison among five particular types of fast food in terms of consumption in Melbourne from 2005 to the prediction for 2025.
Overall, the proportion of Hamburger ranks first over the period.
As can be seen from the chart, in 2005, the figure for hamburgers eaten in Melbourne was 40%, relatively 8 times higher than that of Salad with 5%. The percentage of Fried Chicken consumed in 2005 was the second highest data at 35%.Similarly, the features of Fried rice and Noodles were 6% in 2005.Though the detail of Hamburger still remain the most attractive types, it decrease slightly to 38% which is little higher than the second ranked ,the ratio of Fried Chicken, at 37%. There is a significant growth in the number of people eating Salad, at 15%.The difference of the figures for Fried Rice and Noodles are nearly the same at present with 9% and 8%, respectively.
Look at the table in more detail in the prediction of 2025, the data of Hamburger consumption might have a significant increase at 51%. The same remarkable change is envisaged to be applied for the percentage of Salad in 2025, at 41%. The figure for Fried Chicken is anticipated to have a vast increase in the future with 45%, exactly 5 times higher than the predicted data of Fried Rice and Noodles in 2025, at 9%
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-07-09 | grahamoneil | 11 | view |
- The graph shows estimated oil production capacity for several Gulf countries between 1990 and 2010.gree? 61
- Rich countries often give money to poorer countries but it does not solve poverty Therefore developed countries should give other types of help to the poor countries rather than financial aid To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- Figures show that some countries have an ever increasing proportion of the population who are aged 15 or younger What do you think the current and future effects of this may be for those countries 67
- The table displays trends concerning the amounts of fast food consumed in Melbourne Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
- The charts show the reasons why undergraduates and postgraduates choose to go to Parker University. Describe the difference and compare them if possible. 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 233, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Similarly
...2005 was the second highest data at 35%.Similarly, the features of Fried rice and Noodles...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 299, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Though
... Fried rice and Noodles were 6% in 2005.Though the detail of Hamburger still remain th...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 373, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'decreases'?
Suggestion: decreases
...ll remain the most attractive types, it decrease slightly to 38% which is little higher ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 443, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
... is little higher than the second ranked ,the ratio of Fried Chicken, at 37%. Ther...
^^
Line 5, column 556, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...e number of people eating Salad, at 15%.The difference of the figures for Fried Ric...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, look, second, similarly, so, still
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 7.85571142285 25% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 2.0 24.0651302605 8% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 41.998997996 107% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1090.0 1615.20841683 67% => OK
No of words: 229.0 315.596192385 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.75982532751 5.12529762239 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89008302616 4.20363070211 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68376762144 2.80592935109 96% => OK
Unique words: 119.0 176.041082164 68% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.519650655022 0.561755894193 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 321.3 506.74238477 63% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.60771543086 87% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 5.43587174349 18% => OK
Article: 10.0 2.52805611222 396% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 16.0721442886 50% => 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: 28.0 20.2975951904 138% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 74.4209941817 49.4020404114 151% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.25 106.682146367 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.625 20.7667163134 138% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.625 7.06120827912 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.01903807615 100% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.059083098737 0.244688304435 24% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0314070914786 0.084324248473 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0516885408611 0.0667982634062 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.051920597827 0.151304729494 34% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0652582418702 0.056905535591 115% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 13.0946893788 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.98 50.2224549098 119% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.8 11.3001002004 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.92 12.4159519038 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.13 8.58950901804 95% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 78.4519038076 57% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.1190380762 130% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.