{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.035175879396984924, 'fraction_numerical': 0.021775544388609715, 'mean_word_length': 4.6415094339622645, '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}}
Reply to comment by E. L. Miller et al. on “Geodynamics of synconvergent extension and tectonic mode switching: Constraints from the Sevier‐Laramide orogen”

[1] We welcome the comment from Miller et al. [2012] and the opportunity to address their concerns and to expand on several aspects of the proposed geodynamic model in Wells et al. [2012]. Many of the points raised in the comment concern Late Cretaceous crustal anatexis and extension, aspects of the proposed geodynamic model that were developed in more detail in Wells and Hoisch [2008]. We address each of their three main points below.