Relations among pattern studies?

[Torsten]

Hi Patrick,
 
here are some of my thought regarding your speech. In my eyes the properties you describe as loops are caused by the network of similar vords. [see Timm & Schinner 2020, p. 4]. The general principle within this network of similar words is that "high-frequency tokens also tend to have high numbers of similar words. ... words (i.e. unconnected nodes in the graph) usually appear just once in the entire VMS while the most frequent token <daiin> (836 occurrences) has 36 counterparts with edit distance 1. [Timm & Schinner 2020, p. 6]. For this reason the most likely paths in your transitional probability matrix must result in frequently used words.

The cause for the network of similar words is "an existing deep correlation between frequency, similarity, and spatial vicinity of tokens within the VMS text" [Timm & Schinner 2020, p. 4] Or with other words "all pages containing at least some lines of text do have in common that pairs of frequently used words with high mutual similarity appear." [Timm & Schinner 2020, p. 3].

One of your questions was why the repetition counts for [ol] are lower then the counts for [qokeedy] and for [chol]. Regarding this question it is interesting to look on folio 15v. On f15v not only “oror” exists, there is also “oror or” and “or or oro r” immediately above each other on the first two lines. There are five instances for [oror], seven instances of [arar], even 15 instance for [olol], and 2 instances for [dydydy]. This means for shorter vords like [or], [ol], [dy] it is also possible to combine two instances of a word like [dy] into a new word like [dydy] or [dydydy].
Another observation is that for longer words most transitions result in similar word that are recognizable. For instance is the similarity between [qokedy], [qokeedy] and [okeedy] still obvious. For shorter words the transition of a glyph automatically replaces a larger part of the word. If for instance [ol] transforms into [al], [or], or [kol] 50 or 33 % of the glyphs are different. Therefore sequences like [or.ar.y.kar.ol.al] on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. or [tor.ol.dol.or] on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. are maybe less eye catching compared to sequences like [qokeedy.qokeedy.chey.qokeedy.qokedy] on f108.P.37.

In my eyes an important observation for the Voynich text is its variation. Equally distributed glyphs or words doesn't exists in the VMS. (See also my You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. about the distribution of vords containing the sequences 'ed', 'ho', and 'in' in the VMS.)  See for instance the vord <qokeey>. It is the most common vord on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and the third most frequent vord in Quire 20 (see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.). However <qokeey> is only frequently used on some of the pages in Q20. On three pages <qokeey> ist even absent. You can choose every vord you like the behavior is always the same: "No obvious rule can be deduced which words form the top-frequency tokens at a specific location, since a token dominating one page might be rare or missing on the next one." (Timm & Schinner 2019, p. 3). See also You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.@Github. Did that mean the it is necessary to assume different default loops for different pages?

In the long run it is observable that if in a section [chedy] is "used more frequently, this also increases the frequency of similar words, like [shedy] or [qokeedy]. "At the same time, also words using the prefix [qok-] are becoming more and more frequent, whereas words typical for Currier A like [chol] and [chor] vanish gradually." [Timm & Schinner 2020, p. 6].
This could mean that at least for each section of the text different transitional probabilities exists. Therefore it would probably be necessary to assume different default loops for each section of the text. For instance since the group [eo] is more common in Pharma A than in Herbal A it might be reasonable to assume [choldaiin] as default loop for Herbal A and [cheoldaiin] as default loop for Pharma A.
choldaiin in Herbal A - see for instance [chotchol.daiin.cthol.doiin.daiin] on f30v.P.3
cheoldaiin for Pharma A - see for instance [ycheol.cheol.doiir.shekcheor.sar.cheor] on f102v1.P1.6
chdyaiin for Herbal B - see for instance [chdy.chdor.chtol.chdy] on f48v.P.10
chedyqokaiin for Bio B - see for instance [qokaiin.shedy.chedy.qol.chedy.qokaiin.qokaiin.checkhy] on f77r.P.26
qokeeyaiin for Stars B - see for instance [qokeey.okeoey.qokey.qokey.qokeey] on f107v.P.47