[split] Word length autocorrelation

[quimqu]

Quote and figure from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.:

A notable feature of the VMS that has to our knowledge only been discussed by one other publication [20] is positive autocorrelation of word lengths. Word lengths in most meaningful texts are negatively autocorrelated: that is, long words tend to be interspersed with short words (long-short-long-short). By contrast, the VMS exhibits positive autocorrelation (long-long-short-short). Positive autocorrelation is only observed in a limited number of natural languages, but is common in gibberish (Figure 3).

[20] V. Matlach, B. A. Janečková, and D. Dostál, “The Voynich manuscript: Symbol roles revisited,” PLOS ONE, vol. 17, no. 1, p. e0260948, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260948.

Marco, thank you. I see what happens.

My whole summary (even phase 5 about autocorrelation) was about the results line by line, as we were talking about how different the starting of the lines are, if they are the first line of the paragraph, the middle line, the last line, if it is not in a paragraph, etc... The result of Gaskell and Bowern is with the whole transliteration of the Voynich. Doing so, I get an autocorrelation of 0.16, like they have in the paper. 
But doing line by line as I did, its mean is negative (about -0.07). I attach here the results of grouping the autocorrelations (untouched and permuted within line) by section:


This is by currier hand:


This is by writtin hand:


And here we have a histogram:


This is interesting because it says, that at line level, the MS actually has natural language autocorrelation, at least in most sections, currier hands and writting hands.