30-05-2019, 08:29 PM
There is nothing too concrete on how new words are introduced. Just *that* this happens.
More importantly: if the text in the MS was *really* generated using an auto-copying process, it should be possible to pinpoint examples of this throughout the text. Lots and lots of concrete examples. There would be no need to generate a tool to simulate this behaviour.
It would also be possible to produce some key statistics like:
which percentage of words is a modification with edit distance 1 of a recent word, for different definitions of 'recent'.
This is a key value. If this percentage is high, say 80%, then the theory is clearly describing a relevant fraction of the text. If it is low, say 20%, then the theory is *not* describing a relevant fraction of the text. In fact, the vast majority of the text would remain unexplained by the theory.
More importantly: if the text in the MS was *really* generated using an auto-copying process, it should be possible to pinpoint examples of this throughout the text. Lots and lots of concrete examples. There would be no need to generate a tool to simulate this behaviour.
It would also be possible to produce some key statistics like:
which percentage of words is a modification with edit distance 1 of a recent word, for different definitions of 'recent'.
This is a key value. If this percentage is high, say 80%, then the theory is clearly describing a relevant fraction of the text. If it is low, say 20%, then the theory is *not* describing a relevant fraction of the text. In fact, the vast majority of the text would remain unexplained by the theory.