Split (2)

train · 8.45k rows

messages listlengths 3 3
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Should we keep the Electoral college, or take it away for popularity vote? Well, the Electoral College is a process which they cannot hold office, but can help the presidents votes. A popularity vote is which we the citizens of the United States vote on who we would like the president to be. The Electoral Collge helps vote for the president of the United States because there is a certainty of the outcome, and the Electoral College are like presidents too. I support the idea of which keeping the Electoral College for the help in the presidential run. Keeping the Electoral College is vital to the presidents because there is a certainty of the outcome. Richard A. Posner states: \"The reason is that the winning candidate's share of the Electoral College invariably exceeds his share of the popular vote.\" This means that the Electoral College votes count more than the popularity votes for the upcoming president. For example, Richard A. Posner states that \"Obama received 61.7 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 percent of the popular votes cast for him and Romney...\" This means that the Electoral College votes are way more acounted for then the popular votes. Aren't Electoral Colleges like presidents too? They help the presidents votes and help them make decisions also. Doesn't that sound like a president to you? The article states \"The Electoral College requires a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal.\" says Richard A. Posner. This means that Electoral Colleges no region has enough electoral votes to elect a president. The president electes Electoral Colleges to be in there favor. There is a high chance that Electoral College's help presidents in many ways. Such as, the Electoral Colleges are like presidents too, and there is a certainty of the outcome. Lets face it the soon to be presidents need the Electoral Colleges.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Judge a personality in a short span is many times unfair. Therefore, I completely agree with the statement that the recruitment process needs to modify or change. Firstly I will discuss why the interview is not a reliable method to employ someone and in the latter half, I will discuss alternatives to the interview process. Judging someone in a short span of 15 mins to one hour may not always be reliable. There may be a situation where they are under pressure they can not deliver as efficiently as they could in normal conditions. In many cases there is a difference in perspectives, Interviewee may have a correct perspective but does not match with the interviewer's perspective leads to rejection. Our interview processes have become so conventional that many banal questions have been asked since many times and have no relevance in the process. To elaborate more on the aforementioned details, we have many successful entrepreneurs today that were rejected in their past by many companies, for example, Jack maa from Alibaba, bill gates Microsoft. All of them had the potential to be such successful leaders but were rejected because of our unfair interview process. There are many ways one can decide whether a person is suitable for this job or not. As the importance of technology and skills have increased, the interviewee should be asked to prepare a presentation of all the achievement of their and elaborate it. There should not be any time limit to present the same. After the presentation, there should be some follow-up questions on the same presentation. At last, the interviewee should be given a relevant practical task that requires experience and skills. To conclude, I believe that the selection process we have today needs to be changed as it judges the suitability of the job in such a short span.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 4.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Why do people think aliens created the Face on Mars?\" Many lots of scientist of NASA think that the Face was created by aliens maybe they are correct maybe they are not ,my opinion is that aliens did not made the Face. On 1976 NASA discovered the \" Face on Mars.\" Some of the scientist trusted themselves and believed it was made from aliens ,but they wrere actually all wrong. Why? They were wrong because is just a natural landform that didn't prove nothing to the scientist that believed that aliens did it. On April 5,1998, 2 mens when and flew over Cydonia (where the Face was located) and snapped a picture ten times better,sharper one picture you could actually see well the Face. When that happened everyone was waiting for the picture of the \" Face on Mars\" and they discovered for sure that the Face on Mars was only and actually is a natural landform.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Luke had many reasons to join the Seagoing Cowboys. Some of the reasons were he knew it was a once in a lifetime opportunnity as so said in the 1st paragraph, after hearing about it from his friend. The UNRRA hired \"Seagoing Cowboys\" to take care of: The horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas. Luke had made nine trips, the most of any other Seagoing Cowboy. He said, \"the cattle-boat trips were an unbelievable opportunity for a small-town boy.\" He then also stated in paragraph 5, \"besides helping people I had the benefit of seeing Europe and China. He said seeing the Acropolis in Greece was special. One thing that prepared him most was helping his aunt's farm as a boy, it had prepared him for hard work, but not for dangers at sea. The trip had also made him more aware of the people in other countries and their needs. The trip had also, according to him opened up the world for him. Those are all things that either: prepared him for work, who hired him, who believed in him. Also who brought up the idea of being a Seagoing Cowboy, what he did, and what he had said. I'm sure Luke had a great time being a Seagoing Cowboy.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The technological age has advanced to the point of being able to calculate the complex emotions of the Mona Lisa, and there's proposal for moving into classrooms as well. However, this is a sentiment that must be rejected wholeheartedly. Despite possible learning benefits, facial recognition technology in the classroom would be ineffective and would constitute an invasion of privacy. Facial recognition software would be an ineffective addition to the classroom environment. In paragraphs 5 and 6, D'Alto writes of how the computer can sense emotions just like humans can, stating, \"In fact, we humans perform this same impressive 'calculation' every day. For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face.\" The human body has a natural ability to sense emotions within others by performing calculations based on the subtle body movements of others. Even if a machine could replicate this, as the article suggests, it doesn't dimish the face that humans already possess this capability. No emotion detecting software currently available provides anything that a human being couldn't detect, therefore adding them to the classroom would only be providing information that the teacher could already know. Teachers can detect boredom, stress, and enjoyment just like the computer would, and, if they so wish, they can change their lesson appropriately. Technology that reads emotions would be innefective and unneeded in the classroom. Software that can read emotions could, in a classroom, invade the personal, privite lives of the students its watching over. Due to the nature of being a computer, the technology could, as stated in paragraph 6, \"'...recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored.'\" The level of understanding stops at simply recognizing the emotion; a computer cannot discern the reason behind each emotion because it only detects that the emotion is there. Now place that into a classroom, where students from all different backgrounds are coming together to learn, and there will be some students that have had a rough day. Something happened outside of school that was out of their control, and they're just trying to make it through the day and avoid conversation about it. Sadly, they walk into class, and a computer, which a teacher is giving a lesson, notices that the student is distracted and continually pesters them to pay attention, even though the student's interest is not on schoolwork at all. Life is not contained to just the classroom, and external factors will effect a student's emotion before, during, and after class. Those factors could be incredibly personal, but the technology, not being able to sense anything other than emotion, analyzes this personal part of someone's life as much as it would do a bored kid in class. This is a blatant invasion of students' privacy and needs to be prevented from doing such. D'Alto argues that the technology could provide substancial benefits to the classroom by creating personalized programs for each student to remain interested, but this process would just prove overall inneffective or exhorbitantly expensive to implement. To provide reason for this technology being implemented in classes, D'alto states in paragraph 6 that \"'A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,' Dr. Huang predicts. 'Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor.'\" This has to be looked at in two different scenarious: a group class and a personalized class. For the group class, modifying the lesson would be overall inneffective because it would cause other students that used to be enjoying class to become bored and lethargic, thus prompting the computer to modify the lesson. The cycle would continue until the end of class, with the technology switching teaching methods so often that calling the class coherent would be blatant lying. This modification method would only work if each student had their own computer modifying the lesson. In that scenario, each student would be personally invested into what they were learning. However, it also means that each student would need their own computer that holds this technology. For technology that currently is too complicated for ordinary computers to comprehend, that would require schools to invest exhorbitant amounts of money purchasing new computers that could hold this software. For every student to have a computer would be way too expensive for any implementation to be cost-effective. Despite possible learning benefits, the technology would either be too expensive to be implemented or too innefective to be used. It's an interesting concept to imagine a world where computers are able to sense emotions and create a personalized program for each person on Earth. However, this imagination is riddled with expenses, invasion of privacy, redundancy, and overall inneffectivity. As the technology age progresses, it's important to remember to leave teaching to the teachers.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Landing on another planet is something that we have been trying to do for the longest time.Now we have a picture of what we would need for us to be able to land on Venus.Landing on Venus would be a life changing accomplishment that is very dangerous considering the planets atmosphere and inhospitable conditions.The author supports this idea through information from NASA and comparing it to our planet. NASA has been working on prototypes to survive the harsh conditions of the planet. \"NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus such as some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide they have been tested in Venus like conditions and have lasted for three weeks\"(7).The author provides information from a test that NASA has done to test a posibility of sending electronics to Venus and have succeded in doing so.\"Another project is looking back to mechanical computers an old technology that uses gears and levers to make calculations\"(7).Here he provides more data to the increased chance of technology in Venus and so advancing us into the possiblity of learning more about the planet. Venus is also very similar to earth and could posibly be a future planet where we could live, with it also being called our sister planet due to its familiar landforms.\" The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys,mountains, and craters\"(4).Venus has some similar land forms and is surely not too far away from being earth.\"Solar power would be plentiful and radiation would not exceed Earth levels,Not easy conditions but survivable for humans\"(5).The conditions pn the planet may be harsh but there could be a posibilty to live there or for us to have the chance to land there and do further research on the planet to increase our knowlege and create more posibilities of finding life. In conclusion the author has given information from NASA that they are working on technologies so that one day we will be able to learn more from our sister planet.This would be a revolutinary advancment and is not far from being a reality.We should continue this research and continue to make scientific break-throughs for the future generations.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "ON I understand mom saying She told couldnt get anything pay bills She thought wasnt lot I told Im fine I got I wanted around didnt understand good father helping take care us My mom take care kids self hises But daddy would always say I know would give But beening I didnt want heer stuff cause lies My mom found tow jobs keep everything Then came everything ok grandma passed away My mom auntie uncle make money stuff looked pretty everything went know still cry think Then time I didnt patient hard think gone So mom tell I need learn understand shes better place love ones But day I cant understand meaning someone says gone But forgotten", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In this story A cowboy who rode the waves luckes participation in the seagoing cowboys program allowed him to exerience adventures and vistit many unique places. The text states that after his high school graduation luck had no idea that his life would change. The text also states that after his high school graduation he was working at two places but got part time and then his friend invited him to go to Europe on a cattle boat and lucke sayed yes y wouldn't he say no to his friend. And he went there when world war 2 had just ended he was helping them get food and other stuff they needed. In the story it says that he became a seagoing cowboy and was helpng out the countries that had just ended war. After helping them out in stuff they needed they got free time to get to rest or to do stuff that was in the place where they had the animals in. I feel like they helped a lot after war and they did really good at helping good thing we don't have wars in our world.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Have ever awkward situation lightened mood laughter I many I find laughter makes people comfortable allows person Laughter even help attract positive friendly crowd enjoy funny happy people Laughter work way everyone ways helped I homeschoolers group years ago nt know anyone After walking around girl talked She funny able laugh made comfortable I fun time I fin right person Another time laughter might ve helped I invited birthday party friend I nt seen two years Several others I nt seen long The whole visit awkward I wanted blend I acted like everyone else I d laughed comfortable I would ve person When I first came public school I nervous meet new people kind people would After week people got see personality funny happy laughable person inside clicked lot people That s I m friends people I m friends alike personalities matched Laughter brought good place life Laughter make lot people happy comfortable awkward situations It encourage people show personality attract people like I think world would happier place everyone could laugh", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Global warming is certainly the problem of the new millennium. The Major cause for this is the overuse of fossil fuels. The natural sources under the Earth's surface are used in various ways. However, the main demand is for the production of plastics and for vehicles. One of the suggested solution is the rise in the cost of this material. Although this could lower the consumption, I believe that this would not confront the current problem. The usage of fuels created water and air pollution. Gas is commonly used in cars, which significantly increased the contamination of the air. Boats are major problem for water pollution, as they realise an enormous amount of oil into the ocean. Above that most of the plastics ends in the sea, endangering animals' lives. Rising the cost of fuels might lower the usage, but not prevent the global warming. Higher prices would not stop industries from trading and producing plastic materials. It would rather create greater monopoly and increase the gap between the rich and the poor. To solve the environmental issue, in my opinion, more attention should be pointed towards renewable resources. Lowering the costs in the latter would increase the usage of it even among the middle and the low-rank. Taking electric cars as an example, that do not realise any toxic gases, making them affordable would help reducing the air pollution. In addition, the government of each country should create standards for natural, renewable resources, defying how much renewable energy must be created per year. In conclusion, the global warming is a huge issue, that must be confronted. Since the major cause for it is the high demand for fossil fuels, many believe that with the increase in costs would reduce the problem. I believe this is not the case and to truly solve the problem the renewable energy should become more affordable.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "I don't think this is very valuable, because when are those students going to be able to use this kind of technolgy. LIkeit said in the passage this technology cannot be used on a regular computer because it stores similar anatomical information like an electronic code. It has algorithms that are too advance for the regular at home computer. Yes, the students can learn about it and learn how to do it, but what good is that doing them when they don't have the sofware as students in a school to do this kind of coding system. \"For instance, You can probably tell how a friend i feeling by the look on his/her face.\" You can tell what kind of day someone is having by the look on their face, so do you really need a bunch of special expensive equipment to go deeper into something you can do with just your eyes? \"According to Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving your facial mucles not only expresses your emotions, but may also help you produce them. (\"putting on a happy face actually works\") Yes, you can make your own emotions when you are happy, sad, mad, or confused but if I can tell that without fancy computer I think I'll just keep doing it by myself. \"Empathy ( feeling someone else's emotional state) may happen because we unconciously imitate another person's facil expresions.\" So if I can imitate someone else's facial expressions how do they people who are running the test to see how I'm feeling really know how I'm feeling. How will they know if I'm just imitating their epxression or not.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Today, technology is developing rapidly and so are we and so are mediums of information. Nowadays, if any, things happen in any part of the world, the news reaches us. The question arises here whether the news we receive is reliable or not? Because of this many people think the news has no evident connection with people life so reading news from a newspaper or watching it on television is a waste of time. Watching or reading news has its own pros and cons in my opinion. In todays world we need to stay updated all the time. News plays an important role in keeping us posted about the day to day events. Watching or reading news can provide around the globe information and it is the biggest exposure one can get. Nevertheless, This can only be possible when information is coming from a trusted source. As the number of sources of information grows, sources of fake information also grows and no information is way better than fake information. Due to the rise of fake information people are now not interested in knowing the news because it has nothing to do with people's life. In conclusion, news is extremely important part of our lives and we need to follow the news, but the news needs to come from a reliable source a source which is authentic in nature. For that government and news channels has to take responsibility to show authentic and genuine news, otherwise serious action will be taken against them.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Today in class I read a article on \"Driveless Cars Are Cming. I will be writing to tell you if I am against the delevopmet of these Cars. Or I will also be writing to tell you if I am not against the delevopment of these cars. I am not against the delevopment of these cars because people get the change to see what is like to get in the car and not have to drive themselves around because the car do it for them. They also get the change to see what techonogly can do with a car. I am also not against the driverless car because the car have sensors on them and they are still able to do somethings with the car. Such as Pulling the car in or out the driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navgating through roadwork or accidents because the car will alert them to. I think this is a good thing because within in 10 years the sensors had become more advanced to detect and respond to the danger out-of-control skids or rollover. This is a good thing because no one will get hurt while being in the car. The sensors on the car can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine which is a good thing so the car stop at stop signs, red lights, and when someone is crossing the street. Reducing the power of the engine is a good thing because the car will slow down when it need to. In conclusion, In my writing I told you about why I am not against the development of thses cars. In my writing I give the detail why I am not against the development of these cars and why I think it was a good idea to make the cars.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Join the seagoing cowboys you will be able to help other people. Sometimes you can sea cool animals or take tours of old castles and ruins on your way to the drop point. You can find new freinds and traditions from the other seacow boys. If you get board we play games after the animals have been droped of we play games like table tennis tournaments or voly ball baseball fencing boxing and reading and righting games help him pass the time. The trips can be dangerous if your watching the catle at night. Its a once in a life time event. Have you ever been to Japan or China. No, will if you join the seagoing cowboy you will. If you have never gone boxing or play the games listed in the first paragragh you will. Plus you will get to help people in need. The trip can be dangerous just be carful going up the latter and make sure it is dry when is raining. The trip can be dangerous if you are not carful. Playng game can help pass the time. Finding new freinds and triditions isn't hard. The sites are amazingly cool. So will you join the seagoning cowboy?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Driverless cars are going to make a huge impact on multple people who own one in many positive ways. Nevertheless, driverless cars can possibly impact on people negatively. Therefore, I do not agree with the invention of driverless cars for thr United States. Located in paragraph one, the positive behind driverless cars is that they use \"half the fuel of today's taxis and off far more flexibilty than a bus.\" Sergey Brin believes that these care will fundamentally make a difference in the world. Another amazing fact is that these cars can drive independently drive themselves more than half a million miles without crashing. Located in paragraph two, line four, it states that these Google cars are not particularly driverless. These cars appear to alert th driver to take over the car when the car is pulling in and out of driveways. They even alert the driver when dealing with complicating issues with traffic. For example, \"navigating through roadwork or accidents.\" Car accidents can happen in a split second. It may alert you right away, but this will not give you time to turn away or slam the breaks to keep you from being involved in the wreck. If you happen to be involved in an accident, who is to blame? Located on paragraph nine, line nine, it states \" new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of the accident. If the technology fails and some is injured, who is at fault-the driver or the manufacturer?\" This is a huge problem! Most people now will trust that this car will not wreck, however, if they do get involved in an accident they will blame the manufacturers. Like most large businesses will defend themselves and bring them to court. Finally, what about the teenagers? They go to school and study real hard for their future. The first car they receive is a driverless car. How will this teach young adults to be responsible? How will young adults learn the basics of paying attention to everything on the road and around it? Personally, this whole driverless car invention is sounding a bit lazy and crazy. As a sixteen year old with a drivers permit, I would rather drive on my own then to sit in a driverless car. Driving has helped me to not be completely oblivious in my surroundings. I have learned to pick up some sort of detail in everything. Driving has also helped me with my reflexes. Ina driverless car it doesn't sound too reassuring. Driverless cars can impact many people in many different ways. This invention can save us fundamentally. This invention could lower the car accidents rate. Nevertheless, we the people can do that on our own. We all just need to pay more attention on the road, and to know when or when not to drive. That is definietly one way to save money. Don't believe me? Many people just feel like driving instead of walking. If it is a nice day out and the store is a mile away. I do believe people have the ability to walk. Get out and enjoy. Like I have said before, and I will say it again. Driverless cars can impact many people in many different ways.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The obstacles builders Empire State Building faced attempting allow dirigibles dock stress building s frame The stress dirigible s load wind pressure would transmitted way building s foundation nearly eleven hundred feet The steel frame Empire State Building would modified strengthened accommodate new situation Over sixty thousand dollars worth modifications made building s framework", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The article driveless cars are coming is useful way of telling us how the cars had some issues with some of the cars and the systems. In the article it has been said that they have issues on navigating raodwork and accidents. Which they have alerted the drivers to take over whlie pulling in or out of their driveways or dealing with major traffic issues. With these issues and problems they have found a way to make it stop by the companies making a computer driven for cars. As in the 1950's general motors were created for a concept car that could be ran on a test track. Which it had electraial cable and radio singals that a receiver on the front end of the car. Driveless cars are coming had some advantages and disadvantages which made some of the cars act funny and some to work out. Some of the advantages that some of the cars had were manufacturers cars. Which came out to a smarter cars they put starters on the cars that ha d needed a sensor in it. They have found out that Google modified a car called toyota prius using a roof camera near the rearweiw mirror. It had four automotive radar sensors in it , an GPS system, and a inertial motion sensor. The thing that was most important about the the technology they used was dubbed lidar it was used to a laser beam to form a updating 3-d model ofthe car surroundings. Some of the inputs were necessary for the cars from a skill of a human wheel. The driveless cars coming had some better outcomes and better things in it. in the 1980's the cars had more speed and sensors in them the cars had became more advance to detectand respond to the danger of a out-of- control for skids and rolovers. The information in the sensors now caused the cars to apply brakes on an individual wheels and reduce power from the engine. allowing far better response on them. More imrovements in the sensors and computers hardware and software to making a safer drivable car. Driveless cars were something interesting the sensors weren't there the computers had mapping and radar in them. Now succes had come in 2013 bmw announced the development of traffic jam assitant. Cars were now made handled driving functions at the speed up to 25 mph but special touch sensors in it. Drivers were alerted to ready to take over when the backing objects. flasihng", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In order to solve environmental problems, governments in the world have been seeking various methods. Some people suggest that increasing the cost of fuel for cars is the best way. I admit that it certainly can give an advantage of environmental protection. However, this way is also followed by some drawbacks and more efficient and effective ways should be adopted. On the one hand, the elevated fuel price can reduce the use and purchases of private cars. Due to the high cost, people are willing to choose public transportation like buses or subways when they go out, which greatly decreases their carbon footprint. Furthermore, some people who have plans to buy a new car, are likely to consider hybrid cars or electric vehicles as a better choice as a result of cost-efficiency. As a consequence, the use and the purchases of gas-powered cars all present downward trends, which therefore yields many benefits to the environment. On the other hand, I am not in the support of the perspective that raising fuel prices is the best way. Because of the policy, many fuel companies tend to exploit more fossil fuels like oil for high profits, which leads to dire damage to the environment, So, more efficient ways should be taken into consideration. For instance, governments should explore alternative energies via developing solar energy or building up offshore wind farms and increase people’s environmental awareness through public signs. Only by taking these measures together can we solve environmental problems in a better way In conclusion, increasing the fuel cost will be conducive to protecting the environment. But just doing so is not enough and more measures should be explored and adopted.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The author Winter Hibiscus probably chose end story way its ending sense hope Also showing Saeng adapting surroundings much like winter hibiscus In second last paragraph Saeng hears hanks geese noted sound become familiar course time Saeng probably vowed retake test geese returned time would allow grow adapt even The hibiscus budding sign overcame obstacles successful adopting If hibiscus could adapt Saeng could She could look plant inspiration This feeling hope Saeng future left last paragraph story ends", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "People have different views on whether the museum should be used for education or entertainment. Although educating the civilizations through the museum is crucial, I believe that these could also be used as a source of entertainment. At the outset, one main reason that museums are needed to be used for educational purpose is that these can work as live presentations. As various subjects related to History and Art have been read by people in their schools and institutions, but not every person is capable to remember longer theoretical texts. Thus, by visiting such places the practical aspects of that particular subject have been accomplished and in-depth knowledge can be required. To exemplify, a report produced by the Education Department states that school children who have visited museums can have 60% more grip on the subject of history. On the other hand, by making the museums more enjoyable, more benefit could be achieved. Firstly, due to the influence of cinema and theatre, if we can make museums more entertaining, more visitors and tourists can get attracted towards these significant places. So from an economic viewpoint, by charging reasonable fees, this money could be used for the maintenance of ancient artefacts. Secondly, by increasing the number of tourists, museums can bring laurels to the country. The Madame Tussaud, a wax museum, is a good example of this which has brought a sense of pride for London on the world level. Thirdly, the information could be grasped more easily if it is provided enjoyably. Because learners are more open to the facts and hence, from my viewpoint, entertainment is also beneficial in the field of education, if it is used in museums. In conclusion, it is a matter of debate that what should be the purpose of museums. While museums can be used for providing information, I believe that it' should be entertaining to increase the influence on the public.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 4.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In 2013. BMW announced the development of \"Traffic Jam Assistant.\" They can steer , accelerate, and brake them self , but all are design to notify the driver when the road ahead required human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents.this mean huan drive must remain alart and ready to take over when the situation requires. The bad pary is that these BMW car can drive you off an road. Lead you into a car incident. Even throw you dont have to touch the wheel. what happen if the car leed you into the wrong lane. It can drive you ton the wrong part of town. Also, might leed you to the middle of nowear. if have a gas leek. who are the going to blame. If your engine goes out how ar you going to fixed it. who can you blame for the car blowing up, if you had an oil leek. how will we know what will be the law for home . If some one car get stolling. who and what are we going to blam. Can we truss that the car wont brake down. If the car dont idenify ther costemer. what can we do to prevent the bad ,", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "I think bad books taken library All bad books music magazines movies one really wants read If kid picks book reads bad content books magazines music movies would bad read If young enough nt know movies anything else library bad s library s fault letting get book movies music magazines If parent nt know kid read book parents wondering got bad phrases There people think libraries bad books There many things books parents nt want children read There things like books talk sex There also language kids read I know sure I nt want kids read anything bad grow older There also music parents nt want kids listen There things like sex songs There also things nt say sex directly imply I never want kids listen bad songs like I want responsible listen terrible songs There also movies I nt want kids watch content movie There many things world contain bad things something sex Latly movies came inapropriate Their one thing I think important magazines There many things happen magazines like porn I hate kids tempted forced look porn I think general get rid porn descusting pictures magazines", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Many companys out there are striving for driverless cars. It's an innovation that has been predicted for decades. There is, however, some problems that can occur with the automated car. Most people would think of this as an argument of if A.I. should drive, or if humans should, but I believe it's more like an argument between the human error or the limited thought capacity of a computer. The thought of automated control has been thrown around in many subjects such as border control turrets to androids. It's also been a popular science fiction subject for movies like The Matrix and iRobot. In both of those movies, the A.I. takes control over humanity. If certain disasters were to happen, the A.I. wouldn't know what to do while a human could. On the other hand, the automated car could save lifes. Many people each year die in car crashes, and alot of those crashes are drunk/distracted drivers. In an automated car, the human could be drunk and the car's performance wouldn't be affected. If only the human couldn't drive the car, nobody would be able to speed, or get in car chases. Car related deaths would go down for sure. In the end, automated cars is almost a certainty for the future. Humanity always strives to be more adavanced. A case can be made for both sides on if it's the right way to go, but automated car just makes a stronger case. If a car can be made to react to certain problems, the automated car will be a hit. I guess you just can't hold back innovation.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In the article \"Unmasking the Face on Mars\" it tells us about a \"face\" that was found by a NASA Viking 1 spacecraft. Many may belive this \"face\" was created by aliens on Mars. However I will prove to you using text evidence that this so called \"face\" was actually just a landform. In this artice on May 24, 1976 a NASA spacecraft was circling Mars searching for a place for the Viking 2 to land on the planet when it came across a landform that looked like a face. However, it could not have been a face due to the low quality of a picture the blurryness made the image look like it had shadows that gave the face a nose, a mouth, and some eyes. In order for NASA to prove to the Americans that this was not a landform created by aliens on Mars they took another picture in 1998. By looking at this picture and another picture from 2001 in these higher quality pictures it does not look like a face at all. Another reason other than physical evidence, is the fact that NASA would not lie about life on Mars. If the U.S. found physical evidence of life form on any other planet than Earth they would most definetly spread the news. Finding life on other planets would be a huge accomplishment and a very exciting thing. One landform from a blurry photo that looks like a face will not prove there is life on Mars. \"It's not an easy target Cyndonia,' says Garvin.'In fact it's hard work.\" A quote from the article \"Unmasking the Face on Mars\". Why would NASA put in hard work to prove that the landform was not an artifact made by aliens? Because its not an alien made artifact. They took time and a lot of money to see if it was just a landform so they made absoute 100% sure it was just a landform so that they didnt waste money on chance. In order for aliens to be able to survive on Mars, they would have to have food, water, plants, and shelter. All of these things Mars does not have. How is an alien supposed to survive without the natural resources it needs to live? How would an alien even be able to make a huge artifact on mars without any tools? In conclusion, the landform found on mars was indeed not made by aliens. They have picture proof, if they actually found evidence for life on Mars they would tell the world,they spent lots of money making sure it was just a landform, and Mars doesn't have the resources that an alien would need to survive. If NASA ever finds life on Mars they will tell us but for now Mars is a big empty planet.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "I, one hundred percent agree with the creation that was approached. By the way they explain the technology and advancement in the project it sounds legit, I mean it does have its flaws and improvement But the flaws isn't anything bad, Its just certain area on the rode you have to help more. I think its an wonderfuk idea. The way they say it assist you is very helpful for the elderly. Some people are handicape and was waiting for an idea like this. Everybody isn't able to move around and do alot of things because they are disabled but a invention like this will change all of those problems. I gave as many reason as I can about the wonderful invention. The main reason is it will help the commuinty and maybe the robbery rate will go down because alot of people wouldn't have to walk anywhere for them to get ran up on an rob or worse murdered.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The future is getting closer and closer every year. Certain car manfucaturers are paving the way in technalogical engineering. They are creating driverless cars. This means that the car can drive it self. No longer will people have to spend several hours constantly driving on a long road trip. With these new cars the future of drivng will change forever. There are many positives to driverless cars. They are efficant, safe, and easy to operate. Driverlass cars will be able to manage themselves in every way without a human having to worry about it. Since the cars are self driving they will just need to know were to go and they will do it. With a GPS they can find the closest and fastest way to get to its destination. Humans will not need to worry about getting lost or making the wrong turn, the car will do all of that and more for them. And with the new technology that cars have now these driverless cars can become electric as well. Some already are. That would make it the ultimate future car. Safty is the number one rule for car manufacturers, the driverless cars are one of the safest cars around. Their sensors can detect when the car is going to fast, slow, or getting too close to other cars. If one of these things happen then the car will alert the driver so they can take over. Most if not all driving accidents are casued by human error, with these driverless cars that will no longer be the case. Diverless cars can also help disabled people drive and get them to their destination safer and faster. Ease of operation is another big thing for cars to have. Whether is new drivers learning how to drive for the first time or people who just want to try out a driverless car, they will be easier to opertate. The controls would be simpler than regular cars, although still similar. The driver will only have to take over when they need to or want to. Putting in the address of the destination will be easy. From there the driver will just have to wait until they arrive or they are needed to take over. With how easy to operate a driverless car will be, more people that were not driving before will be encouraged to get one. So in conclusion, Driverless cars are efficant, safe, and easy to operate. If these car are made and become the new standered for driving, it will benefit everyone. Especally if they are also electric, which most of them already are. The benefits are greater than the negitives. Besides who would'int want to have a future car that drives for them.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 4.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In this article, it explains about how dangerous it is to travel and explore Venus. It mentions how our technology cannot last more than a few hours on Venus. From what was described in the first three paragraphs it seems like there is no way that you can travel or explore the planet without any hazards. The author claim's that there is a way to travel and explore the planet without any hazards. The information the author provides to support the idea is that there is a way and its a worthy prusuit despite the dangers there are. Through out the article after paragraph three the author explains all the ways that make it possible to explore and study Venus. He explains in paragraph four that since Venus is much similar to our planet, Earth, that we should look into Venus again and try to gain more information about the planet. It's the nearest option for a planetary visit so why not. The author mentions in paragraph five that NASA has a idea for sending humans to study Venus in a safe way. Their idea was to have a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above to prevent being near the hot surface of Venus. At this height it will be survivable for humans. This sounds very workable. The only down side is that this makes it harder to study the planet and its surface. The author at the end of the article says that we should be able to travel to any place and should not be stopped or limited by any dangers and doubts. Many of the authors claims in the article were quite good and were quite reliable. He used NASA to back up his claims about how there is a way to travel and study Venus in a safe way and why we should. Venus is very similar to our planet and it is also the closest planet to us. Even though it might not be easy to travel and explore the planet. We should anyways because this will not be only equally intimidating thing we humans will have face. We might learn some new things that might to lead to other things.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The Facial Action Coding System is valuable in a classroom to read students' emotional expressions. Every school wants to be able to offer the utmost help to each of their students in order to assist their success in their education, but sometimes schools are clueless when it comes to assistance. As adolescents grow and thrive, they are at the most fluctuating stage of their lives when they are going through grade school, high school, and college. Throughout this time their emotions are heightened and this sometimes makes it harder for teachers to break through to their students; however, with the Facial Action Coding System, teachers might attain a better grip on the situation. In school, their are several different types of pupils; some catch on to topics faster than others and some need more of an explaination to understand, but they can only receive the help they need when they speak up for themselves, which some students find difficult to do. \"The facial expressions for each emotion are universal\", states Dr. Huang, a professor at the Beckman Institute for Advanced Science at the University of Illinois. Since each facial expression is universal, then the Facial Action Coding System can know exactly what each student is feeling when they are introduced to new topics, without the students having to say a word. This could ultimately speed up the process of learning. Since the moment people learned how to say their first word, emotion has been the root of everything that people comprehend. People learn to succeed because they know the devastating defeat of failure and they learn to exceed their expectations because they have had their share in disappointment. In order to make a student truly remember something teachers need to place an emotional connection to that certain topic. The Facial Action Coding System will inform the teachers of the emotional reaction each student has to the lesson; then the teacher can improve their teaching techniques in order for the topic to appeal to each of their students' emotions. If their is no emotional connection to the subject a student is learning then they are most likely memorizing the topic just to pass the class. The Facial Action Coding System would be extremely valuable to pupils and teachers. This new innovation in technology could lead to a whole new level of learning and could help schools impact their students in a better way. This system could enable teachers to know exactly what to do in order for them to really teach each one of their students and could change the way adolescents approach their education.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 4.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "These days we live in an advanced society where artificial intelligent robots are becoming popular. Hence, there is an opinion that ultimately robots will replace all job positions. I disagree with this statement and truly believe that it is unlikely that machines can take over the jobs that require humans. This essay will explore the reasons why only some jobs will be substituted. It is argued that most jobs can be carried out by robots. This can happen mainly because many companies will figure out that artificial intelligence requires less investment either in human training or employment. For example, in restaurants in Japan, many waiters were replaced with robots that cost far less than employees. In addition, these robots do not require any holidays or breaks. For these reasons, some jobs will be replaced by robotic intelligence. On the other hand, there are some human jobs that are impossible to achieve by artificially intelligent robots. These jobs include psychology, education and social work and cannot be succeeded without human involvement. Talking early childhood education, as an example, the teacher plays the main role of providing a child with a model of behaviour as well as supervision and encouragement. Additionally, positive feedback and empathy are essential for young learners and can be only provided by educators, not robots. In conclusion, although it is obvious that some jobs can be substituted by machines in future, there is no way to replace all jobs, as human interaction and eye contact are required for most of them.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 4.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In regards to being for or against driverless cars, my stance is mainly against them. The reasons for my standpoint are fairly simple, especially for one who may feel the same way. For one who may not, this is the argument. The first reason for my stance being against driverless cars is because the idea of a car controlling itself seems unsafe. There is no way that driverless cars would or could be any safer than cars with drivers behind the wheel. It is considered by many that \"the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times\". Also, the next reason behind my standpoint on driverless cars is that they are not completely necessary anyhow. There really is no point in having a driverless car if a driver is still needed for certain situations. The question being asked about the situation is \"why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver?\". My stance on driverless cars falls against them. Driverless cars are no safer than a car with a driver, and the point of a driverless car does not exist if a human driver is needed behind the wheel at any point in time.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In passage The Mooring Mast obstacles builders Empire State Building faced attempting allow dirigibles dock lined These obstacles safety nature law Safety obstacle passengers dirigibles would put danger This evident line dirigibles outside used hydrogen rather helium hydrogen highly flammable The dirigibles could blown many past Nature obstacle dirigibles could hard time attaching mast weather un desirable This supported quotation winds top building constantly shifting due violent air currents The wind could cause dirigibles move around uncontrollably would nt safe anyone There law airships urban areas obstacle This law explained quotation law would make illegal ship ever tie building even approach area This law made unnecessary mooring mast could legally used The obstacles outlined passage The Mooring Mast allowed architects avoid wasting funds something would nt profitable", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The Electoral College shows many reasons why we should change it to popular vote. Like for instance The Electoral college is not fair, but by voting with popular vote not only will more people vote but more people will vote for who they want to vote and not get confused and vote for the wrong candidate. Theres many reasons why the Electoral College isnt fair like, how Bradford Plumer stated during the 2000 campaign a variety of states that didnt vote because of not being able to see a campaign ad and they did that because some candidates dont focus on the states that they know theyre not gonna win. But by voting with popular vote you get to vote for who you want, everone gets to vote because every state would be equal and people would vote for the president and not for the slate of electors. yes, maybe the Electoral College could be good for something for like winning. Also if you think about it, it could be worse like even worse than the 2000 fiasco election, and plus the Electoral College avoids run-off elections so thats a good thing if you want a clear winner. Other than that popular vote is much more sufficient than Electoral vote because its much more fair and with popular vote everyone votes on who they want to vote and every state gets the same, equal treatment as the others.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The planet called \" Earth Twin\" is called Venus. Venus is the most alike planet to earth density and size. Another name for Venus is the \"Evening star\" because not only its the closest to look liike eath density ans size it also the closest planet to earth. So at night you can look you and see Venus. Venus even had some space craft send to the planet but noe of the survived the landing on the planet over three decades. This planet surface and atomspher both have extream conditons. The atomspher of venus is 97 percent carbor doxide and the clouds rain corrosive surface acid. And the surface is over 800 degrees fahreheit and the peressure is 90 time than earth. Even thought Mercury is closter to the sun Venus has the hottest surface. And thats because of the weather patters and the voclanos. Or it because the powerful earth quakes or the lighting strike. The NASA want to still try to send thing to this planet it lear thing they cant touch. They know the probly they have to solve before they really send anything up there. There was people in the 1800s trying to figur out Venus mistorys and people even going over that to see if they miss anything. Alot of researchers was trying to past the challenge but didnt know how because the heat of the planet was messing upthe rocket they was sending and there tryinh to fiuger out that problem now.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "You should join the Seagoing Cowboys program for many reasons. One reason that you should join is because it is an opportunity of a life time. Another is becasue you get to help people. A side benifit of that is that you get to see Europe and China. It will also open your eyes to be more aware of people in other countries and their needs. If you join the Seagoing Cowboys program you will get an opportunity of a lifetime. In the article Luke said that he couldn't say no on joining the program because he knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime. You also would get to help people in need from World War ll. You would also have the benifits of seeing Europe and China. In the article he said \"Besides helping people, I had the side benifit of seeing Europe and China......\". Last but not least it will open your eyes and make you more aware of people in other countries and their needs. At the end of the article Luke claimed that being a Seagoing Cowboy made him more aware of people of other countries and their needs. In conclusion you should join the Seagoing Cowboys because you will be living the opportunity of a lifetime .You will also get to help people that need help after the disasters of World War ll. It will open your eyes to the people of other countries and their needs too. As well as letting you see Europe and China, while you are working! Please consider joining the Seagoing Cowboys and help around the world.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In memoir Narciso Rodriguez Narciso Rodriguez mood created author respectful First Narciso s parents courages When Narciso talks parents says My mother father come country courage without knowledge language culture Rodriguez paragraph Narciso gives parents respect deserve describing actions courage Narciso s parents wanted kids better life When Narciso explains parents came United States says They came selflessly many immigrants give children better life even though meant leaving behing families friends careers country loved Rodriguez paragraph When says They came give children better life shows Narciso s parents love kids much could give kids better future deserves great respect Finally Narciso greatful parents When Narciso describes feels towards parents says I always grateful parents love sacrifice Rodriguez paragraph When author says I always grateful shows author thankful parents therefore shows respect All memoir Narciso Rodriguez mood created author respectful", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In story Winter Hibiscus Minfong Ho main character troubled moved away home culture customs even food different Therefore main character difficulty adapting new environment The author concludes ending statement show stop trying achieve goal She wants take test change see time things changed The story emotional expresses great deal sorrow overcome end", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "New ideas, and smart engineering has been making it possible and eaiser to do many thngs. With cuttuing edge technology and knowledge evolving, humans have been acheiving and setting for the unthinkable. From cars traveling faster than the speed of sound, to cars that can drive themselves. Some aren't to happy with the image of that. Think, can cars really drive on their own, and what if the cars crashes who's at fault? The idea of self driving cars scare many that maybe why it's actually illegal to even test computer-driven cars, stated in passage 9. This is because it isn't a hundred percent safe, though Google has cars that have been driven for a million miles without a crash, stated in passage 2. I think it would make a big change if cars could drive themselves. There would probably still be car accidents, but there would be as many. Self driving cars would have many pros because there could be less texting and driving, which means less accidents. There would also be less drunk drivers which mean leass accidents, and there could also be less people dying. This would be a deal breaker for parents they could actuallly monator where their kids go. There could be less accidents among teens and in general. Kids wouldn't have to lose their life because they ran out in the street and was hitten by a car all because the child was getthing a ball. I think that by the year 2022 that cars will be on the market And would help and save many people. \"Automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved. Tesla has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time.\" Its better that it's 90 percent safety than 20 because nothing can ever be perfect but we can always try to be as close to it as we can.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In short story Do Not Exceed Posted speed limit Joe Kurmaskie expresses features setting like lack water find help end affects cyclist story During time need cyclist says It didnt really matter I going die birds would pick clean leaving expensive outdoor gear diary last entry praise old men wisdom The cyclist lack necessities features around letting pride fall giving hope When cyclist finds hope And drank deeply sink I overwhelming urge seek Gary Wilber kiss buy bait The cyclist astonished stumbled onto appreciated still alive The cyclist taken old peoples advice granted look onto peoples sense directions", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "There is like billion stars up in the stars. Anyone can't really see stars that good because the stars are tiny. Earth and Venus are like \"twins\" because Venus is the closet planet to Earth, also have the same density and size. Earth, Venus, and Mars are by each other but the sun go out different speed around them three. Humans haven't been on Venus or Mars. There haven't been one single spaceshiphas touched down on Venus in more than three decades.Humans are studying reputation and factors for Venus. Long time ago, Venus was probably crovered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth. Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. The planet have the same familiar features such as valleys, moutains and craters. If someone like NASA wants to send a few people to travel to Venus it'll take a long time to travel up into spaces because it's just not like you can drive in a car or fly in a plane, it take days to go up in space. NASA is working/studying approaches on Venus. High pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impedimentslike erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface. 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Mercury is closer to our sun.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The author concludes story Winter Hibiscus When come back Saeng vowed silently spring snow melt geese return hibiscus budding I take test again The author ends promise commitment shows hope determination Saeng vowing I take test shows determination unwillingness fail That enough bring hope someone failed wants another chance This paragraph also sums displays Saengs good character It shows Saengs strength even though failed first time going put pain trying succeed To fail try shows great inner strength The author also ends paragraph when snows melt geese return hibiscus budding brings everything back full circle It holds promise Spring better things come There many reasons author concludes story when come back Saeng vowed silently spring snows melt geese return hibiscus budding I take test again", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The created author memoir warm inviting In quote authors childhood revealed feels The innocence childhood congregation family friends endless celebrations encompassed forms backdrop life warm home Also author says creats happy shows greatful parent s I always greatful parents love sacrifice The last qout wraps feeling life feels It warmth kitchen humble house cuban feast always filled air scent music life loveI never forget parents turned simple house home This quote show love warmth everyone family house bring people together This showed warmth love selflessness family", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "There many obstacles attempting allow dirigibles dock Empire State Building One reasons dirigible hanging one cable tether would add stress buildings frame This stress would cause buildings foundation crack This obstacle caused architects strengthen foundation cost sixty thousand dollars modifications Another obstacle make another floor would used passengers would let elevators bring passengers eightysixth floor baggage ticket area would located These observation areas double boarding area dirigible passengers Once done complete roof framing mooring mast could take place Another obstacle nature winds top building always shifting dirigibles usually land open fields could weighted lead weights could used Empire State Building would hanging pedestrians streets Another obstacle law airships flying low urban areas This would make illegal dirigible tie even approach Empire State Building All many obstacles led ideas dirigibles mooring mast dirigibles dissapeared", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In today’s society, there is a progressively often-discussed belief that most of job will reinstate by artificially intelligent robots. While it is possible that difficult and danger jobs will eventually be taken over by robots, but it is improbable that jobs which indispensable without human help will be taken by AI. This essay will discuss the reason why ultimately, there some processes that yet need human participation, and cannot be requiring by robots. Artificially intelligent robots one day easily may replace all human work and effort. Several companies will take helps of robots because it is economically and durable, and better than look for workers, teach them new technologies and pay them monthly salaries. For example, in many rich and huge companies such Amazon, AliExpress, are use robots with artificially intelligent to handle some of the work in their workshop. These examples show us that robots could easily do some usually routine task. Conversely, there are many things, which human skills cannot be requiring by robot, because it is biologically impossible. For instance, robots cannot feel feelings such as love, happiness, joy, sadness, etc. They cannot love a person and have feelings for him or her. If discuss in depth and study the human biological system, then a robot will never can be similar like human body. They do not have a reproductive system. They cannot have children, etc. Second example like two or more people communicate with each other, share their problems, and solve them together. However, robots cannot do the same thing because just have not special algorithm in their system brain for these. A robot, in our understanding, is an assembled brain with systems and algorithms beyond the boundaries of which it cannot cross. These factors clearly illustrate that a robot can never be the same as a human. Hence, I conclude that there are many jobs that robots can reinstate and help humans. Done job more efficiently and clearly. However, artificially intelligent robot cannot be similar such a human. I think nowadays robots are not yet so advanced", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In \"The Challenge of Exploring Venus,\" many challenges of studying Venus are presented; however, the author provides many valid reasons as to why researchers should find ways to study this planet. The author describes the similarities of Venus and Earth, provides solutions to living on Venus, and expresses how researching Venus would be an advancement of the human mind. The author supports their claim of Venus being worthy of pursuit despite its dangers, by suggesting that Venus may have once been similar to Earth. The author wrote in paragraph 4, \"Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth.\" By suggesting that Venus could have some answers to Earth's climate, the author provides strong support to their claim. The text also states in paragraph 4, \"The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters.\" The author goes on to describe how Earth and Venus may have been closely related long ago. It is also mentioned that Venus is one of our nearest options for a planetary visit, which is beneficial considering the how long space travel takes. The author's claim is supported through this evidence of Venus being Earth-like at one point in time. Another way that the author suppprts their claim is by providing some solutions to studying Venus, despite the dangers it possesses. The author writes in paragraph 5, \"NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape.\" In paragraph 5, the author continues to explain how the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth, solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not go over the radiation levels on Earth. The solution that the author suggests helps support their claim of Venus being worthy of pursuit by giving direct evidence as to how researchers may go about doing this. Lastly, the author supports his/her claim by explaining how overcoming the challenge of studying Venus, would be beneficial not only to the insight of the planet, but also of human curiosity. The author says, \"Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors.\" The claim is strongly supported through the author's description of how studying Venus could be beneficial to the human mind. Another detail from paragraph 8 is, \"Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation.\" The author supports that studying Venus would be worth overcoming the harsh conditions, as it would expand our views of imagination and innovation. Despite all of the author's reasons for studying Venus, he/she describes how Venus has harsh conditions that must be overcome first. The text states, \"These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals.\" The author expresses how Venus's conditions are far more extreme than any conditions on Earth. However, the author supports their claim by providing various reasons that support how Venus is worty of pursuit and how researchers may go about overcoming the dangers it possesses. In order to support his/her claim, the author was able to provide at least three strong reasons that show how Venus would be worth studying, even though it presents many dangers. By explaining how Venus may have once been comparable to Earth, providing solutions to current problems, and expressing the benefits of studying Venus, the author is able to strongly support his/her claim with valid evidence.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In the story the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. It says in paragragh one that venus sometimes called the \"evening star\" is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky, making it simple for even an amateur to spot. The dangers of this could be that each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun. NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus. One example is, some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions. Another project is looking back to an old technology called mechanical computers. By comparison, systems that use mechanical parts can be made more resistant to pressure, heat and other forces. NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Imagine a blim-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape. They are still working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus. So i think that it is worth studying more about Venus, there are so many interesting facts about Venus. We've come up with different things to protect ourselves from the extremes heats. Also astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth. Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "When you look at these pictures what do you see? It may be a face to some people and to others it might be just a natural landform. We'll never really know the truth unless somebody goes there or since its been a while it may not even be there anymore. If you went there would you come back with false or true evidnece to help support what you think it is. On May 24,2001 the text say, \"Twenty five years ago something funny happened around Mars. NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft was circling the planet, snapping photos of possible landing sites for its sister ship Viking 2, when it spotted the shadowy likeness of a human face. An enormous head nearly two miles from end to end seemed to be starring back at the cameras from a region of the Red Planet called Cydonia.\" This shows that if this two mile long \"human face\" was real this must of had to of been a giant living on Mars. The text also says \"Scientist figured it was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh.\" This shows that this helps us know that it could of just of been a Martian mesa since its common around Cydonia. In the image of 1998 I can see where they see the face, but then look at the picture from 2001 it just looks like a large landform. Yes it could of decayed but then by the time 1998 come it should have already been decayed and you would of thought that from image from 1976. If the mesa was a human face then it wouldn't really have all those cracks like the image from 2001 has. The text says \" A few days later NASA unveiled the image for all to see.\" What kind of rucous do you think this would of caused? The text says \" A few days later NASA unveiled the image for all to see. The caption noted a \"huge rock formation...which resembles a human head...formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth.\" This shows that they might of added the resembles a human face, because they can't really put if it was unless somebody actually went to Mars. Many people would have had there different opinions on if it were really a human face without the 'Resembles a human head\" part or not. The authors who wrote the story about the resembles a human head thought it would be a good way to have the public engage in attention toward Mars. It did! the text says \"The Face on Mars has since become a pop icon. It has starred in a Hollywood film, appeared in books, magazines, radio talk shows.\" This shows that the Face on Mars is so popular even though it couldn't be a real human head.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In The Challenge of Exploring Venus the aurthor suggests studying Vens is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. I believe that the aurthor thinks this because Venus is the closest plant to earth by the means of density and size because of that it is often referred as the twin of Earth. On Venus the planet in its self is a challenging planet to land on. The clouds in Venus are made of highly corrosive sulfiric acid. The temperature on Venus is about eight hundred degrees Fahrenheit. The atmosphereic pressure is ninty time greater than Earth. The tick atmosphereis almost ninety-seven percent carbon dioxide. Compared to Earth these conditions are far more extreme for humans. So extreme that there has not been an attempt to explore VVenus in over three decades. Out of all the planets in the solar system Venus has the hottest surface temperature. Astronomers believe that Venus may have once been like Earth a long time ago. Venus might hav had oceans and could have probably supported many forms of life just as Earth. Venus still has some features that are analogous to Earth though. The surface of the planet is a kind of rocky sediment and has familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. In conclusion I have discussed why the aurthor thinks Venus is a planet worth studying. I have talked about the conditions of Vens such as the atmosphere and the temperature. Finally I talked about the terrian of Venus and how similar it is to the terrian on Earth.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "A growing number of people are adopting modern technology to socialize. However ,this practice brings about a mix beg of both and bane. This essay will discuss two of the main driving forces behind this behaviour and the main reason why I believe it is mostly a negative trend. Firstly,It is reasonable to assume that one of the main driving forces behind the rise in online socializing is the advantage of social media in the last two decades. Digital natives have grown up being able to communicate with people from all over the world through direct messages,photos,voice chat and video. This has arguably shaped the way they internet and has shifted more of their social connections online. In addition to the influence of social myriad populations have had to deal with unprecedented situations such as the 2008 financial crisis or the more recent COVID-19 pandemic. While the 2008 financial crisis led to many young folks being unable to find work and spending extended periods of time at home. The covid 19 left much of the world's population effectively housebound for weeks and in some cases, months on end. This means that the public had to adopt socializing online. Although, there are many benefits to socializing online and it has proven to be highly advantageous in extreme situations. It is mostly a negative trend when it is overused in my opinion. For starters, cyberbullying is a major threat to the well-being of both children and adolescents. Cybercrime occurs on a regular basis on platforms namely Instagram and Facebook. In addition, the rate of suicide among teenagers is arguably on the rise as a result of this phenomenon. Along with that, the young population who interact virtually have fewer opportunities to practice their interpersonal skills. Users are increasingly texting one another on Facebook rather than communicating in person. This can lead to anti-social behaviour and depression. In conclusion, socializing online, If it is being overused can affect young folk's mental health as well as their quality of life. This is why I believe the virtual interpretation is mostly detrimental.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Dear state senator, I have come to a conclusion that I argue in favor of changing to election by popular vote for the president of the united states. I think if we kept the Electoral college and we voted for this person and he went against us and chose the wrong person for president we would be out of luck. Voting ourselves for the president of the United States would be the best for everyone. No one would get confused on who they want to vote for or wo they want to win the election. In my opinion its just best that way. as they say in source 2 \"can voters control whom their electors vote for? Not always.\" If you cant control whom your voting for as the president it makes no sense to even vote. That's like saying im voting for no reason. For example in the Electoral College you aren't voting for the president your'e voting for the electors who then votes for the presidet. If you dont know who the elector is going to vote for how do you know to vote for that elector, let's say you do know and they change their mind and go against you. You cant do anything about it but hope for the best. I say get rid of the Electoral college and let voters vote who they want to be the president of the United States.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Students will be able to learn better if they had a more effective teacher. Using the Facial Action Coding System could help students and teachers to learn, and teach. Facial Action Coding System is a great way to get teachers to be more effective, and know what to do when teaching students. An example could be said through the article, \"A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,\" Dr.Huang predicts. \"Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor.\" (Alto Para. 6). Like said in the article if the system can pick up the students feelings such as, happy, mad, confused, and/or bored. The system can change the way it is teaching the student. Another way the system can help is, it can tell the emotion of the student. The system can see if the student is really feeling it that day. If the student is ready for the class, the system can give the student a rigorus lesson, but if the student is not really feeling it that day, the system can give the student a more relaxed, easy leasson. This will help the student greatly. This could give the student a way to learn, but not to the point were the student is not learning anything. The Facial Action Coding System could be a great way for students and teachers to learn, and teach. Using this system can help the students greatly. The students can get a personalized way to learn at their own pace, and own method. Teachers get a better understanding on how to teach students. It is all based on telling emotions. The Facial Action Coding System has great value for use in schools.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "This has to be a natural land mark. If it were a face built by the Egyptians don't you think we would find more facts leading towards that theory? This landmark had something special to it,this land mark has unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. If it was an Egyptian Pharaoh the Egyptians would have had to have access to a type of modern tecology to get up to Mars. Not only that but they wouldn't know how to store or make food last in space. The journey up to Mars is a long one. “So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!” If we had saw these type of things then maybe we would need to look further into it, however we didn't so we have no proof that they lived on Mars long enough to build this \"special mound\" or \"Egyptian Pharaoh \". What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa—landforms common around the American West. “It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho.\" People have seen these similar mounds on Earth, However this particualr mound on Mars had some unsual shadowing to it and the picture was taken on a cloudy day making it hard to make out what this could have been. \" But not everyone was satisfied. The Face on Mars is located at 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was winter in April ’98—a cloudy time of year on the Red Planet.\"Then when we had a clear summer day we took another one with better techology, finally revealing it in fact was not a Egyptian Pharaoh just a mound of dirt though some remain spectiable of this \"face\" and how it got there. \"Nevertheless, on April 8, 2001—a cloudless summer day in Cydonia—Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look. “We had to roll the spacecraft 25 degrees to center the Face in the field of view,” said Garvin. “Malin’s team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera’s absolute maximum resolution.” Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo\". In conclusion some people will always remian spectiable of anything, you just have to look at the facts and deiced from there.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Have you ever seen the face of mars, well if you haven't it's this 2 mile land form on mars and because its shadows and some other resons it looks like a pharose face. See when the first picture of The Face was taken it only had 43 meters per pixel making all those little details to show it was just a bunch of rock unnoticable, plus the land was shaped right to make it look like a face . But in 2001 we used our most enhanced camera that had 1.56 meters per pixel. And I know the all the supersticios people who think it's \"Alians\" would say that nothing that I'm saying proves anything but with the new camera that we had if there would have been any housing, which there would have had to be to construct such a monument, thene we would have seen it. Now that i have told my side of the story everyone can calm down.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "While rapidly technical development brings us convenience, it triggers detrimental effects in our daily lives at the same time. Some people hold the opinion that we ought not to use technology due to the fact that it makes life complex, I disagree with this points and will make an objective analysis in the following essay. On the one hand, the advance of modern technology makes our life more complex than in the past to some extents, especially for our jobs. For instance, journalists just need to write reports several decades ago. Nowadays, they need to take photos and videos, even managing social medias because of the development of communication technology. Actually, it cannot be denied that technology makes people’s life complex and elderly generation cannot accept it for a while. However, it can be addressed by offering educational training and resources. Furthermore, it is impossible to discard modern technology in our life because we have relied on too much. When we conduct class, get in touch with our friends and do shopping, we have been accustomed to using Internet and other modern technology. Even though we can change our habits, it will pay for a great deal of costs. It need to be considered clearly whether it is worthwhile just to make so-called simple life. In addition, discarding technology may not lead to a simple life in some ways. It is imaginable that we have to take a long walk when we travelling to other places. It will be a meaningless waste of time and energy. In conclusion, although modern technology makes some people’s jobs complex, we still need to maintain our dependence of technology because it has been an indispensable part of our life.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Everyone has their own opinion on the way our Presidents are elected. Some say they would prefer popular votes rather than electoral votes, while others believe we should keep it the same way. I believe that it is more fair and less kayotic having popular votes rather than electoral votes. I believe that popular votes keep it fair when it comes to choosing a Presidant and does not cause a lot of fights. Although I believe this some say that electoral voting is also safe and keeps people under control. Some United states citizens, including me, believe popular votes are more fair and are more of peoples choices. Lots of citizens believe that with electoral votes it's not fair because with electoral votes candidates don't spend time in all the states, some states don't even see campaign ads. Also it's fair because that means that lots of people truly want that candidate for Presidant. Just like when Al Gore won the popular votes, which mean more poeple like him and thought he would be a great President, lost the whole campaign cause of electoral votes. Citizens also get more say if it were for just popular votes and with elctoral votes not so much because even if their is a tie people don't choose, House of Representatives do. As for others they are completly against popular votes and think that electoral votes are more safe and calming for many reasons. It keeps it fair because it isn't based off which candidate put more comersuals out there or who people know more. With electoral voting you are voting for the electors in The Electoral College who then vote themsevles and are then are counted by Congress. Also with electoral votes not lots of arguing could happen. With popular votes people may begin to argue about who deserved it more cause more peple knew him rather than the other candidate. \"Also it more fair because each state has their own group of electors so they know who is better for their state.\" (source 1, paragraph 5) Although everyone ahs their opinions I believe that popular votes are a better way to vote rather than electoral voting because it's more fair to citizens and less kayotic. Their are many facts and evidence in this world and i history to show that popular voting is more aficient than electoral voting.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Having many different forms of technology that has the abiltity to do things humans are not capable of is truly amazing. This technolgy is bringing scientists new descoveries and solutions. Being able to calculate ones emotions can be very helpful to students who are struggling to undertsand materials in class. The article states, \"A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, Dr. Huang predicts. Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor.\" Teachers are not mind readers, they can not help students if they do not know they are struggling. Being able to know if a politician is not being truthful just by the way they smile can benefit the world in so many ways. We the people want to trust who is in charge. The article states, \"To an expert, faces don’t lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a “smiling” politician or celebrity isn’t being truthful.\" These experts can set us on the right path. I think having this kind of technology will help with students education and the way people think about our rulemakers in the public eye. Being able to calculate emotions is just a step to bigger and better things.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "It is true that today, people tend to give birth when they are older than their previous generation. This trend has several negative and positive effects on their daily life. On the one hand, there are several disadvantages for those who want to have children in their later age. First, moms could suffer from many serious health problems when they give birth late. Those who are older than 35 of age has the higher rate of death because their hormone levels are not suitable for giving birth which lead to medical accidents. Second, boys or girls whose their mother is older than 35 also tend to suffer from many problems. For example, it is easier to have pneumonia for children from those mothers because the preterm birth rate of this group of mothers is higher. On the other hand, I am on the side with those who believe that there are more benefits to having children when they are older. Firstly, people could prepare a better foundation for their children. Raising a boy or a girl is a job which needs both much effort, money and time. Therefore, many people decide to work hard and earn much money they can because it could build a more solid infrastructure for their children. Secondly, it is important for children to have both their parents during their process of growing up. The rate of crime in terms of teenagers, who grow up without mother or father, is higher than those who live with parents. Thus, the decisions such as having marriage or giving birth are crucial when the younger tend to decide quickly. In conclusion, it is still controversy for this trend because of the positive and negative effects mentioned above.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 4.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Whenever architectural work put act thoughts potential consequences thought beforehand In The Mooring Mast builders Empire State Building faced several obstacles attempting allow dirigibles dock The blimps consist dangerous chemicals dirigibles outside United States used hydrogen rather helium hydrogen extremely flammable A possibility flames could result ruined building even worse destroyed city Although fires problem consider greatest obstacle successful use mooring mast nature This building extremely high sky therefore winds get quite brutal If blimp tied mast back ship continuously swivel ruin fabric aircraft A mooring mast bright idea large city like New York The population large area crowded The obstacles architects faced serious helped team kill idea allowing dirigibles dock Empire State Building", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "I believe that the face is just a natural landform. I know this because people discovered or proven if or if not there is life on Mars. People always talk about martians, but never really find them. Mars has peculiar weather conditions. They have dust storms. They dust gets whipped by wind. Mars also gets hit by meoters and rarely, astroids. An astroid hit Mars hard enough that a piece of it flew to the Earth. When Mars gets hit, it forms craters on the surface and can go deep into the ground. The wind could have possibly pushed dust into a crater and formed the face. Also, NASA sends different space crafts and structure to take a look at Mars. Usually the crafts land on 3 or more legs. The craft could have possibly marked a dust mound. Wind three or more legs, you could form the face on Mars' surface. What NASA needs to do is send more crafts and robots. I think they should do that to get mor eevidence then just taking some pictures. THe robots can do things that a human would. The robot can feel the face and dig to see what is under it. Yes, it would ruin the face but we would get evidence and details if we try. In conclusion, I believe that the Face is just a natural landform. We to strive to find evidence on why it is there and why it formed. Maybe there is Life on Mars. The world may never know.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "It is argued whether higher educational qualification makes a person more successful or one's more engagement in paid work straight after school is more beneficial. I am going to examine this question from both viewpoints alongside providing my opinion. On the one hand, the option to start work after school is more attractive, because people can start earning money. In this way, they can become financially independent and support their family as well. This may also help them to acquire skills about how to manage expenses or budget, which they can implement further in their life or business. One good illustration of this is a successful businessman named Ratan Tata, the owner of Ambuja Cement Company, who chose to work just after school education and became one of the richest persons in the world by applying his knowledge, skills and real-life experiences to the business. Thus, this example vividly demonstrates that getting higher degrees is not necessarily needed for a successful career. On the other hand, few individuals have the opposite opinion because they may believe that attaining academic qualifications offers better options. There are some professions that cannot be joined without a relevant degree such as doctor, engineer, lawyer, and many more, as all these occupations demand academic qualification with intense training and practice, but also offer lucrative salary packages and more financial stability. Moreover, people can easily switch their careers at any point in their life. When they feel monotonous after working in one field for a long time, they can enter in new jobs as compared to those, who dropped the idea of attending university or college. In conclusion, it seems to me that for having successful career, one may not need any academic qualification, as it is just a piece of paper that cannot decide someone's future.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "I think that they should keep the electoral collage because the founding fathers established it in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. The Electoral Collage process consists of the selection of the electors. Under the 23rd Amendment of the Constitution, the District of Columbia is allocated 3 electors. Each candidate running for President in your state has his or her own group of electors. Most states have a \"winner-take-all\" system that awards the electors to the winning presidential candidate. After the persidential election, your governor prepares a \" Certificate of Ascertainment\" listing all of the candidates who ran for president in your state along with the names of their respective electors. Your state certificates of Ascertainments are sent to the Congress and the National Archives as a part of the official records of the presidential election. The Electorial Collage restores some of the weight in the political balance that large states lose by virtue of the mal-apportionment of the Senate decreed in the Constitution. They avoid the problem of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of the casts.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Venus is worth studying, you never no when we would poosibly need a new planet. The author is trying to explain what it is like on venus how hot it is and how much it is different from earth but also have a few things they have in common like they are really close in size. Only a few aircrafts landed on Venus but were destroyed in the matter of a few hours. Venus has a surface temperature of over 800 f .Venus has an thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets. To top it off are clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus atmosphere. NASA is working on approaches to study venus safely, NASA is using the weather that Venus would have agains a silicon carbide container and lasted for 3 weeks in the chamber. So that is why it would be a great idea to learn more about our galaxy.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The mood memoir importance family says beginning much loves cuban culture heritage For example parents shared cooking duties unwittingly passed rich culinary skills love cooking still today I eternally grateful Passionate Cuban music I adore day filled air mixing aromas kitchen Narciso Rodriguez enjoyed ethnicity much Him family always open welcoming people My parents always kept arms door open many people considered family Knowing would us Narciso also became close immigrants bloodrelated Growing envirement instilled great sense family nothing blood relative Quite contrary neighberhood made mostly Spanish Cuban Italian immigrants Narciso close many people considered family", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "This article is talking about the the planetary neighbors of the Earth. on this article explains how others planets move around the sun and the earth,how are thir differences between the speed of this planets. Also explains why the humans never visit this planets, and how are their enviorment. Venus, somethimes called the \"Evenig Star\" is the closest planet to Earth. this planets have differents such as, the size between their, the speed that they move around the sun, this speed mean tht sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus. The big question here is, why humans never visited this planets in more l tha three decades. Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, no since no spacecraft survived the landing for more that a few hours. Numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study, despite its proximity to us. A thick atmosphere of almost 97% carbon dioxide blankets Venus. On the planet's surface temperatures average oner 800 degrees Fathrenheit and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. Also notable, Venus has the hottest sufrace temperature of any planet of solar system, wheather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, and powerful earthquakes. The National Aeronautics Space Administration (NASA) has one particulary idea for sending humans to study Venus, Venus would aviod the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up andout of their way, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit. No easy conditions, but survivable for humans. However, Venus can provide only limited insinght on ground conditions because most forms on light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere. Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus. For now humans can't go to explore others planes as Venus, but I think with the step of the time, humans are going to envolving more on their technologies. Something that everyone know clearly, both planets as Mars and Venus have a lot of differences between our planet. Can humans can go to others planes in next close years? By: Alex :)", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In 1976 Viking 1 snapped a photo of Mars. Viking 1 spotted a shadowy likeness of a human face. Many people think it was created by the life on Mars. Many people think that it is just a natural landform. There was no alien creation after all. I am going to tell you why this is just a natural landform created on Mars. First, Michael Malin and his MOC took a picture of the \"face\" and claimed it to be just a natural landform. The picture was more clear than the orginal 1976 photograph. When NASA got a good shot at the \"face\" they rused out there to the Red planet to get a good shot. Jim Garvin said, \"We photographed the Face as soon as we could get a god shot at it.\" And it was revealed that it is a natural landmark. On April 8th, 2001 Cydonia became cloudless. And it was easy for NASA to see the mysterious face. NASA took a picture \"3 times bigger than the pixel size.\" So if there was an object like a airplane on the surface of Mars, you would be able to see what the object was. Turns out that the picture showed a butte or mesa. \"It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River of Idaho,\" says Garvin. The mysterious face turned out to be a butte. Not a Alien artifact. Each pixel in the 2001 photo spans 1.56 meters. compared to 43 meters per pixel in the Viking 1 photo. \"That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars,\" said Garvin. NASA is apart of the Government. The Government lies all the time. So that kinda makes people think that NASA is lying about the \"Face\" being a natural landmark. The Government and NASA are keeping secrets in Area 51. So they must be keeping this whole \"Face\" thing secret too. That it's not a butte or a mesa. But that it was created by life on Mars. In conclusion, NASA still hasn't prooved that there is life in Space. But does this \"Face\" landmark proove that there is? We just have to wait and find out. This is a story that has been going around for decades. And it is still unsolved. NASA recently found ice caps on other planets. And claimed that there was water on Mars but it evaporated, casusing the huge valleys and canyons on Mars.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The feature setting affects cyclist heat know water Also rough road ahead Another problem dry air snakes laying everywhere desert Also hills big problem heat know water Finally problem knew going die birds would eat would nothing left This setting affected cyclist", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Dear Mr. Senator, The way the voting is now in the United States needs to be changed. It should change from Electoral College to popular vote. The voting system is an all or nothing system which means lots of peoples votes would not count for the president they want. If the voting system changes the president would actually be picked by the people and not by a group of people who won the popular vote. The electoral college is unfair to many people because their vote goes to waste if the other slate of electors won. In Source 2 it says \"On the off-chance that those electors win the statewide election, they would go to Congress and... would get... electoral votes.\" That is saying that part of the votes would not count because the other group won and not the one they wanted to win. So then the president will get a certain number of electoral votes based on the population of that state. Some people feel like their votes are not needed as much because if the majority of that state chose the other candidate. The electoral college is a good idea, but people can betray the trust of others. In Source 3 it says \"...each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party's nominee...\" That means the voters have the ability to vote for the other candidate. If someone decides to vote for the other candidate then some peoples votes will have been for nothing. If we had the popular vote voting system then everyones vote would go to the specific candidate, and people would not have to hope the person they slate they pick has everyone pick the candidate they were trusted to vote for. In the end the voting system of the United States is built on trust. If we have the popular vote voting system everyones vote would go to the candidate that wanted it to go to and not have their vote be wasted on a slate that may or may not win. With the popular voting system the president would win on popular vote and not electoral vote; therefore, the president could not cheat his way to power by targeting big states.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "it is believed by some that learners should be taught to raise their concern and criticize while learning in order to upgrade the educational system. However,others find it undesirable and negative move, as it may cause disrespect of teachers and indiscipline in the classroom. Even though, asking doubts without hesitation can somewhere prove troublesome, I completely loud it's overall advantages and favour it. On the one hand, freedom of clearing the questions of scholars sometimes create and you disturbance and distraction in the study room. This is because, lobbies of non serious students are more likely to put an important queries for the sake of creating humor, as they are aware that their teachers are bound to respond. Above all, chances are greater that they can put wrong allegations on their educators for not satisfying their doubts, if they have had any record of punishment. One such case was surfaced in Calcutta when,according to FIR,our teacher committed suicide as he was harassed and disrespected by his students for not being capable of using a smart class screen. On the other hand, I feel that questioning is the basic right of education. Undoubtedly, when anyone learns something, he is more likely to be sceptical about certain facts which can only be eradicated by asking more and more.Thus, suffice to say, being vocal during class time bills confidence which further leads to success. Secondly, interrogation helps the strengthening the bond between teachers and students. Since students' involvement motivates teachers to go beyond their limitations, as it proves that teachers are being heard and understood. So, in a way, in order to build a healthy relationship, learners ought to be liberal to put questions while study time. In conclusion, despite having some chances of arguments and negativity in the classroom, students should be free to reveal their problems in front of their tutors due to fact that it gives them opportunity to learn profoundly and boosts their self-esteem.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "It is deemed by the majority that authorities should be more focused on strengthening the financial system, whereas few are of the opinion that eradicating poverty needs to be the primary agenda. Firstly, we will discuss the significance of a healthy economy, and secondly, we will talk about the logic behind uplifting the broke people. To begin with, a nation's performance can easily be judged by the monetary worth of its currency, which is directly proportional to its fiscal reserves. Nowadays, capital intensive countries are becoming superpower by providing modern dangerous tools to their army for the safety of their union. To illustrate, both China as well as USA are developed plus wealthy countries, consequently, they have the largest army along with infinite advanced military equipment. Thus, it is necessary to prioritize boosting up the reserves, in order to become the dominant republic in the world. On the other hand, citizens elect the government for benefit of the overall society, especially for the weaker communities. Regulators ought to equate the resources amongst the public, to improve the standard of living. For the time being, there is an imbalance in the regulatory system, as the policies of the rulers are biased in the favour of a few industrialists, resulting in poor people are becoming slaves of the superior society. For example, various incentives are being offered to big bulls, like tax holidays for 5 years on fulfilling a few criteria, but reducing subsidy on the gas cylinder from 400 rs to 15 rs for a common man. Therefore, it is clearly evident that people in power are more inclined towards revenue, rather than benefiting the most prominent asset of their country. To recapitulate, the development of the country as well as the growth of needy ones has equal importance and should necessarily be taken care of.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 4.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "businesses have social responsibilities all over the world, however one of the most reason of continuing of all the business is profit, but on the other ,hand they also must consider about their responsibility in all aspects. Marketing scientists believe that for third marketing generation any business that want to be successful must have close consideration of social responsibilities. for ,instance big companies like Walmart have a donation section and for all purchasing during the payment program ask you about donations and encourage people to support others. On the other ,hand they hire everybody in their company even those handicap with low capability or teenager and... .In ,fact they hire someone in order to say well come to the Walmart shop. many other kinds of tasks are to have mind about the earth and our living environment that managers and businessmen must consider too. such as paying debate to the air pollution, paying thinking to the environment cleaning the soil and oceans and everything on the earth. In ,fact the companies understand that if they want to have better achievements in their brands and production they have to show the real support of society and the environment.for example the oil company has different kinds of gas in the gas station and encourages the consumer to purchase the green fuel. by the ,way growing in work without attention to everyone's benefit is impossible at the moment. In ,conclusion if we want scientifically pay attention to earn money and grow in our business we have particular attention to our responsibility and have some profit for the people and take care of the earth and all the creatures that live on it. so as I read about the marketing affairs and know a little beat about the business. Participating with global benefit could have the best choice for all companies and organisations to be successful.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Studying Venus is important for scientists and so is knowing the dangers of the planet. The author states that people should know more about Venus and the risks it will take of doing so as it is dangerous. The article states, \"Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation.\" (P8). Humans will evetually be curious about many things including trying to figure out more details about our neighboring planet Venus. No matter what the dangers are people will come up with many types of solutions to face the problems or difficulties that are stopping them from going further. The author gave a great idea and much detail about what people are trying to do to explore more about Venus, and also how risky and dangerous it is to explore Venus.Therefore, the authors idea about pursuing Venus despite the dangers will eventually happen at some point in time.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Come and join the Seagoing Cowboys who are the best at what they do. They make sure that the countries that are in ruins get food supplies, animals, and more. Seagoing Cowboys go over Sea as the name ( Sea-going Cowboys ) says. Now I will tell you the reason you should join the Seagoing Cowboys. The first reason is that you can sight see wile on the job, witch if you like that, is pretty cool. The second reason is that you can have a lot of jobs on the boat you ride in like, nightwatch, animal care, hay loader, and more. The last reason is that you can make friends wile working. Now that you know what to do come and join the Seagoing Cowboys today. The Cowboys of the Sea if you would like to call it. Please call (000) 000-0001 for more information. If you would like to join go to SharkTooth Lake, FB. Thank You.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Laughter people actually believe money buy happiness happiness comes great things life greatest thing laughter Not show kindness happiness freedom makes others feel good Laughter one best feeling although hurt much It teach others way express forget bad life Anyone laugh anyone make others laugh Without laughter life would bore But never want push laughter even laughter limit There different ways bring laughter someones life different ways funny There good ways funny bad ways A bad way class clown becomes annoying rude get teachers bad side A good way would tell joke maybe sometimes embarrassing work It seem worst laugh make feel better nt look bad think I know I funny times sometimes I make laugh never good laugh someone make feel bad Making another feel bad make look bad others think funny You never want put another people feelings hurting someone makes look like bad guy people think happiness fairy tales also love really want happiness turn friends make laugh Getting another laugh feels great helps build confidence character Having confidence character really helps life brings joy love others think better way It bring people together bring peace You nt try funny make someone laugh sometimes laughter appears reason Laughter could open way win another heart Being bore make seem like interesting person really fun When people fall love find someone share life Sharing laughter could help relationship make stronger All really need life happiness success happiness success comes laughter I also help meet new interesting people friends life With laughter really find good part life There many adventures life take I love laugh makes feel better I m upset Laughing makes feel good inside I also love make others laugh For example I met best friend She upset felt like nothing world going right I knew nt happy I nt want feel like So friend I helped made laugh bad things forget Ever since ve best friends never felt like Laughter really great thing brings happiness us And getting others laugh makes interesting person interesting person makes life easier stress free Sharing amazing feeling great make life stress free Stress slow along sadness When I m I like make laugh Sometimes little things life greatest things life In opinion I think laughter greatest feeling give someone Finding something great like finding meaning life No one really knows meaning life ll never know ability laugh make others laugh part life privilege So go tell joke two make someone laugh feel good", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In this contemporary society, obesity is considered a global issue because of its consequences among all age groups. A large section of society claims a rise in the cost of junk food should solve this concern. This essay supports the assertion to a major extent despite some reasons such as due to a busy schedule. To begin with, increasing the price of fattening cooking can discourage individuals from purchasing the product, and as a result, this can reduce consumption. This means that it could contribute to weight management and improve overall health initiatives. The best illustration as educational campaigns and fitness programs can help people maintain their fitness as well as diet and also address the issue of junk feed roots. Probing ahead, having knowledge of nutrition is important for individuals to differentiate between healthy meals and foodstuffs that are high in fat. Another perspective is, home home-cooked food is valuable. In today's fast-paced world, the community often do not have the time or energy to cook at home and prefers to grab meals from outside. However, this can lead to health issues, including obesity. Fast snacks and other take-out options may be convenient, but they are often high in calories, unhealthy fats, and added sugars. For instance, doctors always restrict the nation from consuming foods that contain fat in order to maintain good well-being and also encourage the public to focus on consuming a balanced and nutritious diet. To conclude, Rising rates of fattening foods can influence individuals to consume more home-cooked meals, which are typically more nutritious. I believe that the aforementioned points support the viewpoint.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 4.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In this article it talked about the position on driverless cars informing people about the driverless cars and what it can do. Google's driverless car can be a good thing worldwide. The driverless car is safe and it has been driven for more than half a million miles without a crash, although Google is not truly driverless it alerts the driver to take over when it needs pulling out of the driveway, the car is able to handle driving at a speed up to 25 miles per hour, and the car comes with a special touch sensor that can make sure the driver is able to keep hold of the wheel. The car is safe and Google has cars that was dable to drive on its own since 2009 and their cars were able to drivemore than half a million miles without a crash or an accident occuring. The cars is not as independent as it should be. When the car need to back out of a driveway it alerts the driver to take over and while it is dealing with traffic issues when the road is busy and need help redirecting where to go when there is roadwork or an accident. The car is safe and smarter on the roads when stuff is not going on unexpectedly on the road. The car can handling driving up to the speed of 25 miles per hour which requires the driver of the vehicle to still stay alert because the car can not do everything a regular car can when somebody is driving it. When the driver is not paying attention the driver's seat is able to vibrate and let the driver know when there is on coming traffic occuring or any problems. To also get the drivers attention The Google car can announce when the driver should prepare to take over. The car also flash its lights on the windshield and other heads-up displays. If the driver is sleeping when the car is watching the road they also watch the driver and pay attention to the driver to keep the driver safe. The car comes with a special sensor to keep the driver and the car itself safe earlier in the '80s automakers did make speed sensors to create antilock breaks and later on the same sensors became advanced to watch out and respond to the dangers on the road that would occur. The special touch sensor can also make sure the driver is keeping their hands on the wheel. BMW crweated the \"Traffic Jam Assistant\" to help out the driver alittle bit when the driver is in need of help with this Google car. The driverless cars are proved to be safe because it alerts you when situations occur unexpectedly, if you fall asleep or if you are not paying attention the car with vibrate all by itself that way you are alert and see everything that going on around you when you not paying attention, the car has driven for more than a million miles without a crash occuring or an accident, it drives up to a maximum or 25 miles per hour, and the car comes with a special touch sensor that senses things.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In this article \" The Challenge of Exploring venus.\" By the author. The author taking about the venus. Venus is panet in the sky. Venus also called the \" evening star\" is one of the brightest point of the light in the night. Venus is the closet planet to the earth. In solr system, venus is the second planet from the sun. A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets vens. Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system. Venus has high pressure and heat. Venus geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes. Venus has a surface of rock sediment and insludes familiar features valleys, mountains, craters. Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit. Venus solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed earth levels. Not eay conditions, but survivable for humans. sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus. Because venus is sometimes right around the corner in space. Venus was covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like eath. Venus has still features that are analogous to those on earth. In the sky different types of planet. Maybe there are ten planet in the sky. Earth is the fourth planet in the sky. Venus has Maybe 2 solar system. Venus close to the earth.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The idea mooring mast atop Empire State Building seemed like grand idea time construction many obstacles overcome The builders first make sixty thousand dollars worth modifications buildings steel frame would reinforce building pressure dock dirigible would create Adding mooring mast would simple placing one atop building So builders constructed huge stainless steel enclosure house passengers enclosure also elevator stairs bring passengers eighty fifth floor Lastly builders complete roof framing mast steel The concept mooring mast ingenious although practicality soon found extremely low Not mention fact builders thousand feet high idea presented many challenges", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The features setting affect cyclist many ways The text first mentions there one sight building car structure kind This shows cyclist felt saccure starting upset Another example text describes cyclist One ramshackle shed several rusty pumps corral couldnt hold lamest mule greeted me You see cyclists frustrated water pumps lame This also could sparked fear cyclist running water He terrified since water tasted like battery acid wouldnt last much longer In conclusion features setting affected cyclist many ways", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The author ended story paragraph order show Saeng looking forward life positive outlook It shows going depressed change life anymore The hibiscus used device storys plot When changes happen hibiscus changes happen story At first Saeng without hibiscus feels hopeless When sees remembers past sad Once plans things start look She begins accept change last paragraph says when come back hibiscus budding I take test again shows Saeng looking future positively positive change hibiscus beginning bloom The author concludes story symbolic way helps express storys themes", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Narciso Rodriguez following definition family memoir In neighborhood despite customs elsewhere cultures came together great solidarity friendship My mother father come country courage without knowledge language culture In United States start lives entirely taking whatever work could find I always grateful parents love sacrifice They showed lives teachings basis life It warmth kitchen humble house cuban feast always filled air scent music life love It learned real definition family And never forget house gracious neighborhood many things learned love I never forget parents turned simple house home", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In our modern life, educating the younger generation is more significant as compared to illustrating maturity.While many people hold the view that the authority ought to expand its resource in educating old people . I vehemently disagree with that position. This essay will discuss the benefits of investing in the education of the younger population and the demerits of prioritising educating adults. To begin with, young people can learn academic knowledge more easily This is because, at this age, they can give their best output in terms of their studies. These younger folks are not distracted by family or job-related stress and they mostly do their best in order to succeed academically whilst the adult in most cases would be occupied with family issues and tend not to concentrate on their studies.For instance, it has been discovered that a significant majority of adults over 27 nearly never acquire the knowledge they learn in school. Additionally, the tax that adults pay to the government will increase if they graduate, get hired by a reputable company, and earn high salaries. The government would spend sizable tax revenue to assist underprivileged and uneducated adults. On the other hand,the youths find it easier to learn and comprehend new skills and ideas while it is difficult if not impossible for grown-ups to cope with learning.Because children explore more than adults, this helps them learn better than grown-ups, according to a recent study.The study notes when adults attempt something new but get a negative result, they usually won’t try it again.One of the co-authors, Dr Thorndike Gopnik, a professor of psychology at UC Berkeley, wrote, “That might seem like the most basic kind of intelligence—even rats stay away from a path that leads to a shock.”The downside, he said, is if adults immediately reject something new after they get a bad result, “we will never learn that the world is more complicated than that.”Children,in particular, have an intense curiosity and drive to explore and this helps them learn so many different things so quickly, according to the study. In conclusion, I concede that minors bring more benefits to the economy of the society that in the future this may have a good effect on themselves and therefore the state authorities should pay more attention to juniors , as they are curious and explore a lot.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Big co-operates and multinational companies are led by leaders who are paid with high wages which they deserve.This is due to the fact that they are highly educated ,hardworking and showed remarkable skillsets in their fields.But the ordinary employees are provided less amount of money due to a number of factors such as years of experience and level of studies.In my opinion, directors of big enterprises have to receive the best payment compared to the common workers. First and foremost,individuals at the leadership level usually possess high level of education from great universities .In addition to that, they own more number of experience in their areas and they are expertised in their domain.They might have tried so hard and faced numerous challenge to attain that role.Consequently the organizations are liable to pay them immensely.For instance,the director of the brand Pepsico has reached that role by her immense amount of effort throughout her career. On the contrary, the regular staffs might not have done several years of work .Also,they do not have proper degrees or masters to fit in a bigger role.For achieving such a level, they have to do lots of hard work.These all factors constitute to the reason for the lower payment of usual workforce. To sum up,the main head of an establishment has to be salaried exceptionally as they are worthy enough for it.Also,other workers have to be paid according to their efforts and experience level.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The setting affects cyclist provide landmarks directions For example narrator states Theyd sounded sure pointing landmarks spouting towns I would come along breezy jaunt Kurmaskie This shows landmarks provide landmarks directions along journey", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Environmental conservation has become a trending topic in recent years. Pessimists claim that there is nothing that can be done to save the Earth, while others argue that human beings still have a chance to modify the situation. In my view, I agree with the latter and I will provide an explanation with examples. First of all, it is undeniable that human activities have brought a number of serious problems to the Earth due to the increase in human demands based on populations. For instance, the average temperature has increased one Celsius since the 1800s, which mainly caused by deforestation, farming and burning fossil fuels. This leads to a threat to many Arctic species such as polar bears in particular as their habitat is melting and disappearing. On the other hand, others including me believe there is still hope because the awareness of environmental protection and sustainable development has raised in recent decades. To be more precise, many countries have started to tackle the negative effects brought by human beings, like reducing overexploitation of natural resources. Instead, professionals are researching and finding other renewable and Eco-friendly resources to limit the demands on fuels. Besides, afforestation is encouraged to offset the damage by deforestation. China is one of the best examples, which the overall forest coverage rate has risen from twelve per cent in the early 1980s to twenty-three per cent currently. As a result, the air quality in China has improved dramatically compared with thirty years ago. In conclusion, even if human activities have caused grave consequences and even some permanent damage to our plants and wildlife, it is not completely irretrievable as long as human beings can learn from previous mistakes and insist on sustainable development.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Cause every thing paragraph story somewere So really intwines gether She learns adapt new home land dose plant", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Car usage is decreasing all over the world quickly. Many people see that needing a car is no longer a priority to them anymore. Many communities are elminating cars in the neighborhood. And in certain areas of Germany, people are not even allowed to have cars. They sell them to live in the neighborhoods. To begin with, limiting car usage is elminating air pollution in Bejing, and Paris and in the United States. In Paris, there has been heavy air smog and if ur caught driving in the streets you get fined 22-euros ($31). Thousands of people were fined according to the international news agency headquarters in London for driving there cars during the smog. Twenty seven(27) people had there cars impounded for their reacton to the fine they were given. Because of the air smog in Paris, people were not allowed to drive anywhere they had to take the public transit to get to their destionation. So reducing the car use in Paris help get rid of the smog faster. Also, another reason elminating car usage is an advantage is less traffic back-ups. In Bogota, Colombia the citizens hiked,biked,skated and/or took the public buses to work which left the street empty of traffic jams. Since the mid-1990s, the city has had \"A Day without cars\" campagin. Over time, the city has seen over 118 miles of bicycle paths being created and most of Latin American citites. Parks and sports centers also have grown throughout the cities. The sidewalks been replaced by smoother ones, traffic jams have had a dramatic drop and also more restraunts and upscale shopping centers were built. So after all, elminating cars is not a bad thing. In addition to, every year in the United States more and more people been buying fewer cars and getting fewer licenses as each ongoing year goes by. So the question that reaks through everyones mind,\"Has America passed the peak driving?\" Well, we may not know that answer for sure but what we do know is there is alot of changes going on. Now we all know this country was the birth place for the very first Model T Ford, and where Wilson Pickett immortalized \"Mustang Sally.\" We all have love affairs with cars in this country, but over the past year our love affairs have cooled down some. Statistics show that between 2001 and 2009, driving by young people decreased by 23 percent(23%). But when this generation \"grows up\" will the car rates start going back up because the parents have to take their children to soccer practice, school plays? This will remain an open question until that time. As of recently the number of miles driven per person has dropped nearly 9 percent(9%) below the peak and the same rate as it was in January of 1995. Part of this explaination is because people were unemployed and could not afford new cars. According to Mimi Sheller, different things are converging. For example, she stated that the internet makes telecommunicating possible and easiar and makes peolpe feel more connected to others without driving around. To conclude, there are a plethora of advantages of why limiting car usage is a great benefit to everyone and even the environment! The air pollution will be cut down by a major percent.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "If there is one thing this country has, it is the will to always come up with new ideas to make objects better. In this case, it is to improve cars. Many people may believe that the idea of a \"self-driving car\" is insane, but I believe it is possible. Driverless cars are coming, and will be here sooner than we know it. Driverless cars look like any ordinary vehicle. What is on the inside of this car is what counts and makes this vehicle so special. The cofounder of Google, Sergey Brin, states, \"The cars he foresees would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus.\" This is a wonderful concept when it comes to the struggle of finances and affording gas money. It is also healthy for the ecosystem. Since there is not a ton of fuel in use, the fumes that are let into the air are not as bad. These cars could change and are safe for the world. People around the world might be confused on what exactly a driverless car is; hence why they would be skeptical of this new idea. The driverless car has set out to be a car that takes over the resposibilities of the road for you. According to the prompt, \"Telsa has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time. Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020.\" These promises to improve the cars will be a start to a better life. There are many reasons and proof as to why this plan could actually work. \"Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor. The most important bit of technology in this system is the spinning sensor on the roof. Dubbed LIDAR, it uses laser beams to form a constantly updating3-D model of the car's surroundings. The combination of all this input is necessary for the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel.\" According to this passage in the prompt, that has already been figured out. If there are skeptics about safety, it states, \"In the 1980's, automakers used speed sensors at the wheels int the creation of antilock brakes. Within 10 years, those sensors had become more advanced to detect and respond to the danger of out-of-control skids or rollovers.\" All of the fears one may have with this new creation has already or is being worked out. Driverless cars are making progress and they are coming. There is still work to be done on this impressive idea, but that is why it was estimated for the future. With everything the companies have created so far, there is no doubt that they will accomplish this task in time. They are changing the world, taking one step at a time.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 3.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "When Al Smith first came plan use Empire State Building mooring mast idea obstacles would face attempting allow dirigibles dock One large obstacle safety Most dirigibles outside United States use hydrogen rather helium hydrogen highly flammable CAPS The reason unsafe gas inside ever happened catch fire entire craft would exploded flames This hazard ship well streets Another obstacle high winds top building The winds top building constantly shifting due violent air currents CAPS This problem would cause dirigible move place The idea using lead weights weigh proposed would danger pedestrians A third final obstacle faced stress dirigible would cause building s frame The building s design capable handling stress dirigible tied mast without changing design dirigible would probable tear building apart The solution strengthen building Over sixty thousand dollars worth modifications made buildings framework CAPS That ridiculous amount money spend make possible dirigible dock It easy see difficult project based many obstacles builders face", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "High-rise apartment blocks are a common sight in cities around the world. They are especially popular in large cities and in locations where building land is scarce. Living in such buildings has various advantages and disadvantages for town planners and the inhabitants themselves.The most significant advantage of high-rise apartment blocks is probably for the town planners. With land often being at a premium in large cities, one way to maximise space is to build upwards, so that the population density per square kilometre can be increased. The demand for housing in big cities can therefore be more easily met. There are also disadvantages for town planners. The heavier population density can put added pressure on social facilities, for example sewage and other waste disposal, and the provision of adequate school and medical services.There are also advantages and disadvantages for the actual inhabitants of high-rise apartment blocks. With the demand for housing being reduced, prices are therefore not as high, making housing more affordable. Many people also like not having to be responsible for a garden, and living in an apartment has this advantage. Finally, with so many people living in the same area, many friendships can be made and a community spirit can be built up. It appears the most significant disadvantage is that, in practice, living in high-rise apartment blocks is just not the lifestyle many people want. In some city neighbourhoods, these living spaces can often be associated with poor living conditions and undesirable social elements. In addition, many people view high-rise apartment blocks as being unsafe. For example, in the case of fire, tall buildings are difficult or impossible to evacuate safely.It is clear that high-rise apartment blocks have benefits and drawbacks. It is also clear, however, that due to the need to house increasing numbers of people in cities, these architectural features are here to stay, whether people like them or not.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The features setting affected cyclist many First town The cyclist first comes upon described ghost town Although cyclist chuckles setting sets long journey cyclist head There features would negatively affect cyclist For example I noticed terrain changing Flat road replaced short rolling hills pg Flat land much easier cyclist pedal The change flat land hills affected stamena keep going He really push trudge hill His determination finally led Gary Wilbers Fish camp pg He finally found hope", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "I feel like driverless cars are a great idea. Driverless cars create opportunity for the driver to do other things. The driver would not have to be as focused as usual. Driverless cars are the future. They are what we need to advance society. They would reduce the number of deaths caused by car accidents. The driverless car would most likely reduce the amount of accidents that occur. In a driverless car the driver must remain alert. There are situations in which the driver would have to take control and focus. Many accidents are caused by human error, so eliminating the room for that error would reduse the number of accidents. Eventhough, the driverless car can navigate itself the driver must remain alert at all times. There are situations in which the driver would have to take control of the vehicle. Some of these situations,like work sites or crashes, require the driver to navigate around them. That is why the driver must remain alert even while in the driverless car. Sergey Brin is really on to something. The driverless car could be a very good way to advance how we travel. Long road trips would not be such a boring drive. The driver could actually see the sights on a vacation trip. Some people would probably be against the driverless car, but with a little proof and convincing I am sure everyone would come around. Sebastian Thrun is right in believing that the technology has caught up to the dream. Now is the time for something like driverless cars to become a reality. People are ready for smething new and innovative. The sensors that make sure the driver is holding the wheel could be a great idea, but it could also be annoying to the driver. If someone gets a call or wants to change the radio station the sensors should just alert the driver, not stop the car or anyhting too ridiculous. Although not having to really drive is nice, safety is still a big concern with something like a driverless car. Making sure the driver and the passengers are safe is very important. The laws prohibiting the testing of driverless cars should be revoked. We need to continue to test them to make them safe enough for people to use and not have accidents in. The safety of the driver needs to be tested so we know what needs to change before releasing the vehicle. The driverless car will have problems in testing, but as long as they get resolved the car would be safe for people to drive. It would advance our way of transport and make things easier. People would be in less accidents and fewer deaths would occur. I think that once people see the driverless car in action they will come aroound to the idea. I think that the driverless car is a great idea, and it is the future for our society.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 4.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The Electoral College was established in the Constitution by the founding fathers. \"The Electoral College process consists of the selection of electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for president and Vice President, and the counting of the electoral votes by Congress\" is stated in source 1. This is process has been around for decades, but things have changed. This process does not fit with what is happening in the present and is outdated. The election should be by popular vote. There is a disaster factor. According to \"Source 2: The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong\", it's says that the state legislatures are responsible for picking electors. The thing is that those electors can betray the trust which has happened before. You do not want to risk having someone defy the will of the people. Some people may argue that the states know what they are doing and are cautious on who to pick, but in the past the electors have refused to vote for their party's candidate. You do not want to put this in hands of someone who will not help you and the other people on such an important event like voting. When you vote, there is a slight possibility of a tie occuring. If this were to happen, the state delegations would vote on which president. Each state will cast one vote, which is not fair because of the amount of representives in different states. \"...the single representative from Wyoming, representing 500,000 voters, would have as much say as the 55 representatives from California, who represent 35 million voters\" is stated in source 2. Some people may say that the bigger states are helpful with voting because the Electoral College will balance out what the large states loss by the population votes. This still isn't fair because this is saying that the smaller states with less representatives do not have much say in the voting and this will turn off potential voters. Some presidents may have a stronger appeal to some states then others. It may have to do with where the president is from (North, South). This goes back to how the bigger states have more power. \"...such as Romney was in the South, has no incentive to campaign heavily in those states,\" is stated in source 3. This means that the bigger states in the South will be known for all voting Romney since that is where he is the strongest and well liked. There may be voters in the South that were more for Obama. Smaller states may hate what Romney is doing and vote for Obama, but they do not have as much power as the bigger states. This is like the winner takes it all, they may know that they have no chance in winning. (Obama did end up winning and was titled as the 44th President of the United States. To others, they may say that each persons vote does count but it doesn't seem like it. The voters in the South didn't see any campaign ad by Romney which was not fair because he was not concerned about them not voting for him. The Electoral College is not a fair process. It worked in the past, but not anymore. Using the popular vote process is more fair for all of the people. They have more say and there votes feel more important. This will encourage potential voters to vote and to become more involved with the political events. We need to encourage potential voters because one day, when they become older, they will be the voters of our country.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 4.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In \"The Challenge of Exploring Venus,\" the author provides a compelling and efficient argument to support the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. Using statistics, factual information, and specific plans being developed as we speak, the author convinces the audience that exploring Venus is worth the risks involved. The author throroughly describes the immersive learning possibilities that could be discovered by studying the foreign planet, the surviveable and safe travel conditions for humans, and other exploration options to ensure a safe and efficient venture to Venus. First of all, the author immediately combats the argument of Venus being too dangerous to venture. When discussing the exploration of Venus, most people are turned off by its reputation as a dangerous and challenging planet for humans to study. While the author doesn't stray away from these harsh extremities, they make sure to prove how these details seem insignificant and how safe travel can still be executed. The author thoroughly describes the plan provided by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to allow astronauts to float above the fray and avoid the hazardous conditions. They provide specific qualities of the plan, such as the air pressure being close to the sea level on Earth, the abundance of solar power, and the containment of radiation, to prove how humans would be kept in a safe atmosphere. They even provide a real world connection between NASA's possible solution and a blimp-like vheicle hovering around the ground to make it easier for the audience to understand. The author combats the speculaiton of Venus being too dangerous to explore in order to further support the idea of it being a worthy pursuit. Furthermore, the author heavily emphasizes the learning opportunities that exploring the foreign planet would undoubtedly provide us. While providing simple, yet interesting facts about Venus, such as it being the planet closest to Earth's density and size, may be enough to intrigue the audience into wanting to learn more about the planet, the author takes it a step further. The author goes in depth about the possibility of Venus being the most Earth-like planet in our solar system long ago. They detail the planet's environment today, consisting of Earth-like structures such as rocky sediment surfaces, valleys, mountans, craters, and other geological findings. They also state \"Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth.\" This information opens up an entirely new realm of possibilites for the audience to consider, and is more likely to interest them as it directly relates to our life on Earth. The way the author has set up the comparisons of Earth and Venus have allowed the audience to view the exploration of the planet as an opportunity to see a planet that could be like us; a planet with living, breathing forms of life similar to what we see everyday. The author uses this information to encourage the audience to view the pursuit of Venus as a chance to gain information on the things we see in our everyday life, and not just complex ideas that are difficult to understand and most-likely won't affect them. Finally, the author provides numerous options being developed for humans to embark in safe and efficient travel to Venus. When discussing the potential plans to explore the planet, the author states \"Many researches are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus.\" This quote makes it clear to the audience that scientists are doing whatever it takes to develop multiple, efficient plans for space travel. The author also goes onto provide different examples to further convey how close scientists are to developing the safest plan possible. They specifically mention the use of simplified electronics made of silicon carbide and explain how they've already been tested in a chamber that simulate the conditions of Venus's surfaces, yet how they're still being improved upon. They also describe an old technology called mechanical computer, noting how this technology has already been used frequently in the 1940's and how it can be incorporated into space travel now. The author has given detailed descriptions of the efforts made and the options available to provide a safe embarkment for humans to support the ideas that Venus is a worthy pursit. Clearly, the author has efficiently and convincingly supported the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. By describing all the information about the existence of other life forms and the similarities to Earth that we could potentially learn from the study, the author proves how worthy Venus is to be discovered. The author also rebuttals one of the main concerns for traveling to the planet by explaining how plans are being developed to make travel and living conditions surviveable, safe, and efficient for both humans and machines. In \"The Challenge of Exploring Venus,\" the author was able to convey and support the idea that Venus is worthy of exploration.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The features setting affect cyclist making mood change In its nice shaded cool feels fairly good Hes excited ready take adventure new path His still good mood comes first town As moves water supply deplets mood sinks lower becomes frustrated In ironic twist fate finds Welchs Grape Juice Factory quit He dejected almost ready admit defeat But forces go finally reaches place water relief mixed wariness old man sitting porch He never take granted advice old men ever", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "On earth there are so many things to do like go running, hiking, going to the beach,etc. But some of those things may be rsiky or sometimes they won't it just depends on what you do. Likewise on Venus, there are limits to things you can and cannot do. Going to Venus doesn't always have risk. For example, simplified electronics that are made up of silicon carbide have been tested.Computers were very helpful for calculations by using gears and levers.If you had sent a cell phone or a laptop into acid it meltf in a matter of seconds. If scientists really wanted to study Venus very well, they would need to go personally to despite the risks.Instead of just researching and gettting information from other people. Some of that information that you have received from others or the searching the web ,may be false facts. Humans have sent tons of spacecrafts to land on Venus. \"Each previous mission was unmanned,and for good reason,since no spacecraft survived the landng for more than a few hours .\" On this planet it is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times great than what we deal with on our planet, Earth.Almost 96 percent of carbon dioxide covers Venus.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Using technology to read peoples emotion isn't really valuable to students in the classroom. As said in this article that it can read human emotion but not for any purpose except changing a lesson to your understanding when you're confused, but other than that there aren't much use for it. In paragraph of the atricle it states, \" you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face.\" This statement from the article basically shows that some people already know how to read human emotion ny just looking, so this technology may only be valuable to people who can't read human emotions as good as others. In the article, it even says \"most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication\" and also says \" so computers need to understand that ,too.\" In any form of communication, a human understands nonverbal and emotional communication which makes it easier for humans to understand that on another human than technology could.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 1.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Personally I nt think libraries movie stores etc selling items mentioned If found offensive public I think offends lots people Citizens senior citizens children nt exposed inaproppriate material I think order buy rent certain books music movies magazines least eightteen years age The economy bad enough way There new generation people raised moment shouldt look back childhood memories seeing offensive movies reading offensive books magazines I think music influences person If constantly listening foul language going stay persons mind I know experience I also believe movies influence peron lot For example kid goes see movie lot violence Well done watching movie thinks well must okay kill someone saw someone kill another person got away never got trouble That one example humans mind change In conclusion I believe humans right read watch listen want I think people certain age things though Also I think anything citizens find offending hidden sort area store library So people want certain item whatever get people see listen anything offending", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 2.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The venus is the temperature atmosphere is sometime challenging at the clouds of highly sulfuric. The temperature is hottest way for solar system,the venus like volcanoes and powerful earthquakes.The earth is like planet in our solar system,today venus still the something in the feature.The hovering is safely for planet because most forms light cannot be atmosphere,the venus would be needed to get up close and personal despite the risks for the people in the world.The heat is more than the system,the technology called mechanical computers these devices since 1800s and played in the important think role in the 1940s during World War ll. The earth proved a very challenging in the place more closely in the life.The sun is different speed in the some time, that is meaning sometimes is close to Venus and the sometimes close to Mars.The mission it was good reason for few time but since no spacecraft.The atmosphere almosst 97 percent carbon dioxiide blankets Venus. That is very much in the life because most people the can died for the this one.The venus is challenging over and over time.The world is so temperatures because is much variable in the life,that makes staying the something is venus and earth.The more importantly is researchers cannot take the simples of rock and gas, or anything else, from a distance.The temperature is gas actually because if the gas not be in the world we can't no what is heat and cold come from.Is important temperature,earth, gas,rock, planet, solar system, venus because the had works for the feature if the not had all this in the life we can't no peaple can't be in the life, the can't died or be sick.The degrees is 170 fehrenheit ,but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on earth.Is was not easy to conditions, but survivable for humans.However the venus it safely at the hours time,but the can be dengerous for sometimes.Astronomers are fascinated by venus because it may well once have been the most Earth -like planet in our solar system.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 0.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "In story Winter Hibiscus teenage girl Saeng family moved united states Vietnam Saeng walking home failing driver s test passes familiar plant She goes florist shop purchase plant She arrives home tells mother failed test course mother upset makes dinner plant winter hibiscus end story Saeng thinks when come back spring snow melt geese return hibiscus budding I take test again I think Saeng says retake test spring feels confident happy comfortable plant mother nt mad She feels everything going ok retake test spring life blooming", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "Some individuals claim that the amount of money squandered in advancing space technology is unjustified and they go further to say that, it could be invested in more advantageous applications. Personally, I strongly agree with the view since there are world regions starving. Albeit, these spatial researchers have their boons. This essay will shed light on both sides of the view and provide anecdotal evidence to prove the arguments. On the one hand, the interplanetary technological investigation is public funds consuming that could be utilised in sectors like medical, safety, and education. For instance, recently, NASA has frittered roughly to a quarter of the US PIB on the perseverance mission to the planet Mar, the equal amount that could be used to construct 5000 medical centres throughout the world, enhancement of others, and farming all African regions. As a result, the world folk continues a deep famine as the death toll widens. Furthermore, nowadays, there is a soaring complaint about the issue. On the other hand, spatial apparatus development escalates the chance to figure out the human beings' new lifestyle. Because of the increased devastation of the planet earth due to global warming, urgent actions are necessary to be taken so that the human beings' specimen could discover the new crowd's home. The recent research carried out by the University of Southampton pointed out that in Jupiter, there are more promising conditions to people's normal life for example. Hence, with the continued attempts and more investment, human beings could move to better conditions on one of these planets. Moreover, it would save the earth's livings from extinction. In conclusion, notwithstanding some benefits this sort of investigation results in, the overwhelming majority of individuals on the earth are in need. Therefore, I still strongly agree with the statement. In addition, I recommend that world-ruling power resolves the internal issues rather than spending financial resources on frivolous activities.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]
[ { "content": "You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy. Do not change any of the instructions above. Append-only rules below define how to compute the single numeric score. Scoring rubric (four dimensions, each 0–25, total 0–100): Content (0–25): 25=all required/relevant items fully covered with detailed support; 20=most relevant items covered with some detail; 15=some relevant items covered with limited development; 10=few relevant items with minimal development; 5=mostly off-topic; 0=no relevant content. Vocabulary (0–25): 25=excellent appropriate range, uses ≥10 target words if a list is provided; 20=good, 8–9 words; 15=adequate but repetitive, 5–7 words; 10=limited with some misuse, 3–4 words; 5=very limited, 1–2 words; 0=inappropriate/0 words. If no target list, ignore numeric counts and judge appropriateness/range. Grammar (0–25): 25=all sentences complete, target structures correct, 0–3 mistakes; 20=most sentences complete, 4–5 mistakes; 15=some incomplete sentences, 6–7 mistakes; 10=several incomplete, 8–9 mistakes; 5=many incomplete, 10–12 mistakes; 0=most incomplete, >12 mistakes. If no target structures given, judge accuracy/complexity only. Spelling/Punctuation/Capitalization (0–25): 25=0–3 errors; 20=4–5; 15=6–7; 10=8–9; 5=10–12; 0=>12. Computation: (1) assign each dimension a banded score (0,5,10,15,20,25); (2) sum for Total_100; (3) convert to 0–5 integer overall by rounding Total_100/20 (clamp 0–5 if needed); (4) output exactly one line in the required format with that integer. Edge cases: empty/off-topic essays → Content=0; ignore absent vocab/structure targets; count each unique error, repeated typos count each time; if borderline between bands, choose the stricter (lower). Remember: you must not output anything except the single required line and integer per the original instruction.", "role": "system" }, { "content": "The features setting greatly affect cyclist First travelling desert California June weather extremely hot cyclist needs water however running water brought along find water thirsty almost dehydrated Also frustrates finds water hot tastes like battery acid cyclist decides conserve water go next town get water another setback The condition road poor cyclist go mph Thus ever reaches next town still wait longer much needed water travelling mph The snake also another setback cyclist fortunately able escape Thus major concern lack water", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your evaluation score is: 5.0", "role": "assistant" } ]

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.