That's something that might take some thought.
Don's solution is going to get high scores because he is using full VMS tokens to represent characters (or character pairs). They match before he has even generated a sample of text. But do you think that each "word" in the VMS represents only one or two letters?
René's sample is character based, which is really a very good result considering how difficult it is to interpret natural language into VMS text. I give him credit for that. It's not a perfect match, but if you think the VMS characters each has a value, rather than a whole word representing only a tiny amount of text then it's possible his lower-scoring text is actually closer to the real solution.
I did something different from both Don and René. My sample is partly character-based, partly based on some patterns in the VMS that I think might be generated in a different way. My score, if I tweaked my sample a little, might be in between that of René's and Don's, but if you have any suspicions that some of the VMS glyphs might be ligatures abbreviations, biglyphs or anything that might not be 100% character-based, then which is more important... a high score or fidelity to the original VMS method (if that can be determined)?
Don's solution is going to get high scores because he is using full VMS tokens to represent characters (or character pairs). They match before he has even generated a sample of text. But do you think that each "word" in the VMS represents only one or two letters?
René's sample is character based, which is really a very good result considering how difficult it is to interpret natural language into VMS text. I give him credit for that. It's not a perfect match, but if you think the VMS characters each has a value, rather than a whole word representing only a tiny amount of text then it's possible his lower-scoring text is actually closer to the real solution.
I did something different from both Don and René. My sample is partly character-based, partly based on some patterns in the VMS that I think might be generated in a different way. My score, if I tweaked my sample a little, might be in between that of René's and Don's, but if you have any suspicions that some of the VMS glyphs might be ligatures abbreviations, biglyphs or anything that might not be 100% character-based, then which is more important... a high score or fidelity to the original VMS method (if that can be determined)?