{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013347022587268994, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.838323353293413, '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}}
A comparison of two alternative approaches to modelling the sea ice floe size distribution.

Sea ice exists as individual units of ice called floes. These floes can vary by orders of magnitude in diameter over small spatial scales. They are better described by a floe size distribution (FSD) rather than by a single diameter. Observations of the FSD are frequently fitted to a power law with a negative exponent. Floe size can influence several sea ice processes including the lateral melt rate, momentum exchange between the sea ice, ocean and atmosphere, and sea ice rheology. There have been several recent efforts to develop a model of the floe size distribution to include within sea ice models to improve the representation of floe size beyond a fixed single value. Some of these involve significant approximations about the shape and variability of the distribution whereas others adopt a more prognostic approach that does not restrict the shape of the distribution.