{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01971326164874552, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.88421052631579, '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}}
Is the PTP Test Useful?

We show empirically that the PTP test has very little discriminatory power, with highly significant PTP test probabilities often being associated with parsimony data that produce trees with low confidence (as measured by bootstrapping) and resolution. Because of this, we argue that the PTP test is useful only in the following, very limited way: if a data set fails the PTP test, it should not be used in a phylogenetic analysis. More conservative methods of measuring confidence such as the bootstrap or decay index are preferable.