{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03638814016172507, 'fraction_numerical': 0.026954177897574125, 'mean_word_length': 4.384057971014493, '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}}
Mayan and Babylonian arithmetics can be explained by the need to minimize computations

Most number systems use a single base – e.g., 10 or 2 – and represent each number as a combination of powers of the base. However, historically, there were two civilizations that used a more complex systems to represent numbers. They also used bases: Babylonians used 60 and Mayans used 20, but for each power, instead of a single digit, they used two. For example, a number 19 was represented by the Babylonians as 19B =1 ·10+9 and by the Mayans as 34M =3 ·5+4. In this paper, we show that such a representation is not just due to historic reasons: for the corresponding large bases, such a representation is actually optimal – in some reasonable sense.