{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01745877788554801, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.45, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Space, Time, and Objects

It is standard procedure to distinguish different kinds of spatial representation, and the most basic distinction is between allocentric (or objective) and egocentric spatial representation. The idea is that egocentric spatial representation is how an organism represents its environment for purposes of perception and action. The directions involved in egocentric spatial representation are above, ahead, to the left, and so forth. Allocentric or objective spatial representation lacks any explicit reference to the organism itself: when I grasp the thought that the Arch d’Triomphe is between the Obelisk and the Grand Arch de la Defense, my spatial representation is in terms of objective spatial relations and perhaps objective units of magnitude as well. I will be concerned in this paper exclusively with the egocentric variety of spatial representation, but in order to avoid baggage connected to that expression in the literature, I will prefer the expression behavioral space to egocentric space.