Need advice for testing of hypotheses related to the self-citation method

[ReneZ]

Back to the topic of the thread, I would be interested to see some statistics coming out of the planned analysis. There is already a qualitative sense that the biological B section is more repetitive than the others.

If it is possible to come up with a single 'indicator' value for each section, this should turn this into a more quantitative result. However, it may not be easy at all to define such a single indicator.

Again, my suggestion would be to start with some simple approaches (how many percent of words can be explained by n-tuple changes from M previous words). n-tuple just meaning: with Levensthein distance up to and including 'n'. 

This will also depend on the chosen transliteration alphabet, but less so (I suspect) than entropy.
Example comparing Eva and Currier:

chol and shol differ by one, as do SOE and ZOE
dain and daiin differ by one, as do 8AN and 8AM

After the simple approach, one can introduce all sorts of modifications and see what happens.