{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016877637130801686, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.780952380952381, '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}}
On terrane analysis

Many recent papers on displaced crustal masses are organized around ‘terranes’ given only geographic names, and are bewildering for other than local experts; self-explanatory descriptive or genetic terms should be incorporated in most designations. Plate-tectonic interpretations of aggregated terranes that incorporate awareness of how modern arc systems vary and evolve contain implicit and testable predictions, but too many interpretations are based instead on invalid assumptions. As actualistic models are applied to analyses of orogenic belts, much more mobilistic interpretations than those generally now visualized will probably emerge. An example is made of the Carpathian region.