First off, thank you so much! It did indeed take a lot of work, and I'm so happy that you feel it's paid off :)
I think sharing my dataset is a really good idea! When it comes to the final attributes, the type breakdowns, and the parameters for assigning attributes to Pokedex entries, that's totally something I can do, and I would like to do that! It would take some time/effort to clean up all the old versions and unused data, but I could definitely make something legible from all of it.
When it comes to sharing the aggregates of Pokedex entries (the parts that look like the Oddish example in the 'Methodology' section) it's unfortunately WAY trickier, and that is nobody's fault but my own.
(I'm so sorry, I know you didn't ask for this explanation, but I haven't shared it before and I would like to!)
For starters, the Pokedex aggregates are split up by type across multiple documents, because having pictures helped me focus, but having too many pictures in one document made my 2013 laptop cry. That only makes it slightly more annoying than the other doable things that I listed earlier, so it's not a huge problem.
The REAL issue is that I kept redefining the parameters for attributes (to make them as relevant/accurate as possible) which meant I kept having to re-evaluate the entries, and at a certain point, I just stopped updating the entries themselves, and would simply make a note of what had to change (e.g. +3 to Fire-Primary "Powerful Attack" or whatevs).
And I did that a whole bunch of times, so now there's a bunch of scattered documents (mostly digital, mercifully!) with notes about my alterations, and new rules/parameters, and it's all just a real mess.
So the Pokedex entry aggregates/analyses themselves (which would obviously be most important to the project you're describing) are no longer accurate, and they are littered with references to attributes which were either removed due to a lack of relevance, or got folded into other stuff to make them more universal. (R.I.P. "Hierarchical", "Discerning (Food/Objects)", "Clique-ish", "Nocturnal", "Intelligent", "Giving", "Protective", and so many more attributes that sadly weren't common enough to test for on their own).
Long story short: It would take a buttload of editing, but since you've brought it up, I do really like this idea! - it would be good closure for me to just make all my data available/legible for whoever wants it, and I would very much like to do that when I have some free time.
Thank you again for the kind words, the good idea, and the opportunity to complain about my own horrible bookkeeping - I didn't realize how much I was holding onto that :)