In attempting to quantify statistically the density structure of the interstellar medium, astronomers have considered a variety of fractal models. Here we argue that, to properly characterise a fractal model, one needs to define precisely the algorithm used to generate the density field, and to specify -- at least -- three parameters: one parameter constrains the spatial structure of the field; one parameter constrains the density contrast between structures on different scales; and one parameter constrains the dynamic range of spatial scales over which self-similarity is expected (either due to physical considerations, or due to the limitations of the observational or numerical technique generating the input data). A realistic fractal field must also be noisy and non-periodic. We illustrate this with the exponentiated fractional Brownian motion (xfBm) algorithm, which is popular because it delivers an approximately lognormal density field, and for which the three parameters are, respectively, the power spectrum exponent, $\beta$, the exponentiating factor, ${\cal S}$, and the dynamic range, ${\cal R}$. We then explore and compare two approaches that might be used to estimate these parameters: Machine Learning and the established $\Delta$-Variance procedure. We show that for $2\leq\beta \leq 4$ and $0\leq{\cal S}\leq 3$, a suitably trained Convolutional Neural Network is able to estimate objectively both $\beta$ (with root-mean-square error $\epsilon_{_\beta}\sim 0.12$) and ${\cal S}$ (with $\epsilon_{_{\cal S}}\sim 0.29$). $\;\Delta$-variance is also able to estimate $\beta$, albeit with a somewhat larger error ($\epsilon_{_\beta}\sim 0.17$) and with some human intervention, but is not able to estimate ${\cal S}$.

The degree of fractal substructure in molecular clouds can be quantified by comparing them with Fractional Brownian Motion (FBM) surfaces or volumes. These fields are self-similar over all length scales and characterised by a drift exponent $H$, which describes the structural roughness. Given that the structure of molecular clouds and the initial structure of star clusters are almost certainly linked, it would be advantageous to also apply this analysis to clusters. Currently, the structure of star clusters is often quantified by applying $\mathcal{Q}$ analysis. $\mathcal{Q}$ values from observed targets are interpreted by comparing them with those from artificial clusters. These are typically generated using a Box-Fractal (BF) or Radial Density Profile (RDP) model. We present a single cluster model, based on FBM, as an alternative to these models. Here, the structure is parameterised by $H$, and the standard deviation of the log-surface/volume density $\sigma$. The FBM model is able to reproduce both centrally concentrated and substructured clusters, and is able to provide a much better match to observations than the BF model. We show that $\mathcal{Q}$ analysis is unable to estimate FBM parameters. Therefore, we develop and train a machine learning algorithm which can estimate values of $H$ and $\sigma$, with uncertainties. This provides us with a powerful method for quantifying the structure of star clusters in terms which relate to the structure of molecular clouds. We use the algorithm to estimate the $H$ and $\sigma$ for several young star clusters, some of which have no measurable BF or RDP analogue.