{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0636604774535809, 'fraction_numerical': 0.05305039787798409, 'mean_word_length': 4.431654676258993, '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}}
Evaluation of the 2005 Redesigned Consumer Expenditure Survey Diary

1 Stinson, L., et. al., Creating a “UserFriendly” Expenditure Diary, Consumer Expenditure Survey Anthology, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Report 967, pp 3-17, April 2003. 2 Figueroa, E., et. al., Is a User-Friendly Diary More Effective? Findings from a Field Test, Consumer Expenditure Survey Anthology, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Report 981, pp 2-8, April 2005. 3 Cues are examples of goods and/or services in each major expenditure category. To, N., et. al., The Efficacy of Cues in an Expenditure Diary, Consumer Expenditure Survey Anthology, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Report 981, pp 9-17, April 2005. Evaluation of the 2005 Redesigned Consumer Expenditure Survey Diary