Relations among pattern studies?

[pfeaster]

To construct the glyph-by-glyph transitional probability tables, it is necessary to count the frequency with which certain glyphs follow one another. These tables are thus derived directly from the text. However, given that the Voynich text exhibits variation, it would be essential to use different transitional probabilities for different pages/sections of the manuscript. If one assumes that a device was used to generate the text, then multiple devices would be required to account for these variations.

Or a device that's responsive to input, or a device that builds cumulatively on its previous output.

I suspect the overall transitional probability matrices are about as stable across pages and sections as the broad distinction between Currier A and Currier B, which likewise doesn't account for the kind of local variation you're describing.

But I'll admit I don't have a good sense of the overall range of variation.  Could you list a few of the most deviant pages or bifolios that your work has shown to have the most locally distinctive word forms?  We could then take a look at the matrices for them and see how -- and how far -- they differ from the norm.