{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02706270627062706, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009900990099009901, 'mean_word_length': 5.423728813559322, '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}}
[Krigle estimation and its simulated sampling of Chilo suppressalis population density].

In order to draw up a rational sampling plan for the larvae population of Chilo suppressalis, an original population and its two derivative populations, random population and sequence population, were sampled and compared with random sampling, gap-range-random sampling, and a new systematic sampling integrated Krigle interpolation and random original position. As for the original population whose distribution was up to aggregative and dependence range in line direction was 115 cm (6.9 units), gap-range-random sampling in line direction was more precise than random sampling. Distinguishing the population pattern correctly is the key to get a better precision. Gap-range-random sampling and random sampling are fit for aggregated population and random population, respectively, but both of them are difficult to apply in practice. Therefore, a new systematic sampling named as Krigle sample (n = 441) was developed to estimate the density of partial sample (partial estimation, n = 441) and population (overall estimation, N = 1500). As for original population, the estimated precision of Krigle sample to partial sample and population was better than that of investigation sample. With the increase of the aggregation intensity of population, Krigel sample was more effective than investigation sample in both partial estimation and overall estimation in the appropriate sampling gap according to the dependence range.