29-10-2025, 10:36 PM
I’ve run the co-occurrence graphs for window sizes from K = 1 up to 10 on the same four corpora: Alchemical Herbal Latin, Tirant lo Blanch, Torsten Timm’s generated text, and the Voynich Manuscript.
The global behaviour is smooth across all K, and most indicators move monotonically: clustering grows, path length shortens, modularity declines. Yet the Voynich keeps its peculiar position: extremely small-world at every scale, moderately modular, and lower in entropy.
Across all corpora, increasing K makes the graph more tightly connected and less modular, but the Voynich keeps its distinct profile. Its small-world index is several times larger than any other text at every scale, and even at K = 10 it remains roughly twice that of the closest competitor. Clustering converges around 0.7 for all, yet Voynich begins lower and catches up only slowly. Modularity drops from 0.28 to 0.22, remaining midway between the natural languages and the Timm generator. Entropy grows with K as expected, but the Voynich still shows lower H_mean and a higher proportion of deterministic transitions.
The K-sweep reinforces the pattern seen before: the Voynich network is not random, but its combination of high connectivity, modest modularity, and low entropy makes it stand apart from both natural language and algorithmic texts.
The global behaviour is smooth across all K, and most indicators move monotonically: clustering grows, path length shortens, modularity declines. Yet the Voynich keeps its peculiar position: extremely small-world at every scale, moderately modular, and lower in entropy.
| Corpus | K | C | σ | Modularity | H_mean |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AlchemicalHerbalLatin | 1 | 0.550 | 86.67 | 0.424 | 2.41 |
| 2 | 0.550 | 86.67 | 0.427 | 2.41 | |
| 3 | 0.620 | 60.86 | 0.373 | 2.94 | |
| 5 | 0.680 | 39.45 | 0.303 | 3.59 | |
| 7 | 0.707 | 29.47 | 0.259 | 4.01 | |
| 10 | 0.729 | 21.36 | 0.223 | 4.44 | |
| Tirant_lo_Blanch | 1 | 0.637 | 169.75 | 0.235 | 2.79 |
| 2 | 0.637 | 169.75 | 0.239 | 2.79 | |
| 3 | 0.680 | 119.96 | 0.196 | 3.30 | |
| 5 | 0.716 | 78.99 | 0.155 | 3.93 | |
| 7 | 0.729 | 59.49 | 0.136 | 4.33 | |
| 10 | 0.739 | 43.82 | 0.121 | 4.74 | |
| TorstenTimm | 1 | 0.610 | 144.11 | 0.142 | 2.99 |
| 2 | 0.610 | 144.11 | 0.142 | 2.99 | |
| 3 | 0.664 | 109.02 | 0.130 | 3.48 | |
| 5 | 0.706 | 76.33 | 0.113 | 4.09 | |
| 7 | 0.725 | 60.25 | 0.107 | 4.47 | |
| 10 | 0.739 | 46.54 | 0.103 | 4.87 | |
| Voynich | 1 | 0.535 | 410.18 | 0.281 | 2.50 |
| 2 | 0.535 | 410.18 | 0.284 | 2.50 | |
| 3 | 0.615 | 307.83 | 0.267 | 3.02 | |
| 5 | 0.674 | 201.41 | 0.237 | 3.68 | |
| 7 | 0.698 | 152.95 | 0.232 | 4.11 | |
| 10 | 0.717 | 115.74 | 0.223 | 4.56 |
Across all corpora, increasing K makes the graph more tightly connected and less modular, but the Voynich keeps its distinct profile. Its small-world index is several times larger than any other text at every scale, and even at K = 10 it remains roughly twice that of the closest competitor. Clustering converges around 0.7 for all, yet Voynich begins lower and catches up only slowly. Modularity drops from 0.28 to 0.22, remaining midway between the natural languages and the Timm generator. Entropy grows with K as expected, but the Voynich still shows lower H_mean and a higher proportion of deterministic transitions.
The K-sweep reinforces the pattern seen before: the Voynich network is not random, but its combination of high connectivity, modest modularity, and low entropy makes it stand apart from both natural language and algorithmic texts.


![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)