{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.008077544426494346, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.138613861386139, '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}}
Response to reviewer comments

We thank Dr. Braeckman for providing additional suggestions for improvement and have incorporated the comments into the revised manuscript. We are also grateful to the two reviewers tasked with assessing our study and think that our revised manuscript reads more fluidly and is more concise after their constructive comments. We also think that the highlight paper suggestion may now be unnecessary after the revision of our manuscript. Some of the reasoning provided in the original highlight suggestion is now irrelevant due to the removal of some information in the revised manuscript.