{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03144016227180527, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004056795131845842, 'mean_word_length': 4.840236686390533, '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}}
Some key rules for the calibration of the numerical time-scale

Summary The building of an acceptable numerical time-scale, in whole or in part, is a complex matter. At the present time, it is often impossible to obtain even a nearly correct figure on which everyone can agree. This is often due to the selective rejection of data which, although considered unsatisfactory by some are accepted by others, and by the existence of data which appear at the time to be mutually incompatible. However, it is possible to draw a series of recommendations which could help in obtaining a result less open to criticism. As a general scheme, a fully documented time-scale (a certainly megalomaniac aim) can only be obtained after a long itinerary of research comprising essentially four stages: (1) the collection of published data; (2) the evaluation of individual data; (3) the combination of data; (4) the drawing of conclusions: this paper summarizes the author's attitudes to these problems.