{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027831715210355986, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0012944983818770227, 'mean_word_length': 5.233870967741935, '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}}
Coding theory of visual pattern completion.

It is possible to construct a line drawing that represents one object partly hidden behind another, and most subjects complete the interrupted figure and see the hidden object as whole. This article is addressed to two problems: (a) What are the necessary and sufficient conditions for such figural completion to occur, and (b) exactly what will be seen behind the occluding figure---that is, what completion will be made? Leeuwenberg's coding model for line drawings was used to analyze a number of such figures, along with the hypothesis that figural completion occurs whenever it results in a simplification of final code of the whole figure. Data from previous experiments along with results from two new experimental studies were collected and shown to agree with this hypothesis. Of various possible figural completions or "mosaic" interpretations, subjects chose the ones resulting in the simplest overall code. However, the above conclusions are correct only if "simple" is precisely defined as the smallest information load in a completely reduced code. Other possible theories of figural completion, both structuralist and Gestalt, may invoke familiarity, particular "cues," like T-shaped intersections, simplicity of the hidden figure, symmetry, and good continuation. All such possibilities were considered in the experiments and shown to fail, wrongly predicting at least one figure. The coding-theory analysis, on the other hand, made correct predictions for all of the 25 figures used.