{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019448946515397084, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009724473257698542, 'mean_word_length': 5.118811881188119, '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}}
Comment on esd-2020-93

The authors present an analysis of differences between two bookkeeping models of land change emissions. They replace parameters in one model with those from the other model in a factorial design to isolate parametric sources of the differences. They find that the drivers of differences are, in descending order, harvest allocation, carbon density, net vs gross transitions, and decay time scales. They conclude that uncertainties in these drivers are too high to determine which model has the best parameters, and that further data development is critical for assessing land change emissions.