{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026522593320235755, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0019646365422396855, 'mean_word_length': 5.290123456790123, '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}}
10 Criteria Defining a Model Forensic Science Laboratory

ABSTRACT This article attempts to answer the question: If it had to be done over again, knowing what is known now, how would the ideal forensic science laboratory be constructed, organized, and operated? A project was initiated to answer this question by the Laura and John Arnold Foundation in Houston, Texas, which brought together select, influential, and highly recognized forensic science icons to discuss and document the elements of the model forensic science laboratory—to the extent that such a model could actually exist. Barry A.J. Fisher, Doug M. Lucas, and Jay A. Siegel (the project team) each authored, independently, a manuscript outlining what they believed were the critical elements or criteria defining the model forensic science laboratory. Once the aforementioned manuscripts were completed, the project team requested that this article be written to independently review, consolidate, and comment on the work of the project team writers.