(30-05-2026, 04:28 PM)bi3mw wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Of course, that doesn't prove the manuscript is meaningless. A table book could also encode a real language or a cipher system.
Ran some of my tests on your output. Hope you don't mind a critical analysis.
| Test | His Output | Takahashi Slice | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tokens | 9,447 | 9,447 | Matched sample size |
| Types | 1,757 | 2,739 | Far fewer unique words |
| Hapax | 683 | 1,856 | Far fewer one-off words |
| Type/Token Ratio | 18.6% | 29.0% | More repetitive vocabulary |
| Hapax / Type Share | 38.9% | 67.8% | Major novelty deficit |
| Mean Word Length | 5.04 | 4.87 | Very close |
| Zipf Slope | -1.021 | -0.841 | Too steep. Common words dominate too much |
| Length Distribution JSD | 0.0047 | - | Excellent match |
| ED≤1 Token Hit | 89.55% | - | Lower than expected |
| ED≤1 Type Hit | 77.52% | - | Weak word-family structure |
| Bigram Reject Rate | 2.94% | - | Reasonably good |
| Trigram Overlap | 79.84% | - | Moderate match |
My eyeballs say your text looks good, almost too good perhaps. The Voynich has it's own license on weird. Which I suspect is why your hapax and novelty are low.


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