(01-06-2026, 12:55 PM)quimqu wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think this opens a new way of checking for relationships between folios and sections.
You piqued my curiosity. In the work I've done it's very apparent scribes had different methods and word shapes. Broadly, Currier A and B. So I decided to see how your low count theory worked across scribes. I looked at hapax tokens that are unique to each scribe and then asked, how those tokens were shared with other scribes. This would match your low count idea without throwing hapax out as noise.
What I immediately noticed was the slow decline in similarity from scribe 1, which is Currier A, compared to the others. Scribes 2-5 compared to each other looks mostly flat.
Hapax per scribe:
| Scribe | Scribe-local hapax |
|---|---|
| 1 | 1338 |
| 2 | 1261 |
| 3 | 525 |
| 4 | 298 |
| 5 | 210 |
Hapax matches to other scribe with Jaccard Overlap
| Pair | Matches | Jaccard Overlap |
|---|---|---|
| 1–2 | 105 | 4.21% |
| 1–3 | 55 | 3.04% |
| 1–4 | 37 | 2.31% |
| 1–5 | 22 | 1.44% |
| 2–3 | 80 | 4.69% |
| 2–4 | 29 | 1.89% |
| 2–5 | 31 | 2.15% |
| 3–4 | 22 | 2.74% |
| 3–5 | 29 | 4.11% |
| 4–5 | 18 | 3.67% |
Hapax matches to other scribes with Jaccard Overlap sorted by overlap
| Rank | Pair | Jaccard Overlap |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2–3 | 4.69% |
| 2 | 1–2 | 4.21% |
| 3 | 3–5 | 4.11% |
| 4 | 4–5 | 3.67% |
| 5 | 1–3 | 3.04% |
| 6 | 3–4 | 2.74% |
| 7 | 1–4 | 2.31% |
| 8 | 2–5 | 2.15% |
| 9 | 2–4 | 1.89% |
| 10 | 1–5 | 1.44% |
Some examples:
| Token | Scribes |
|---|---|
| cheockhy | 1, 2, 3, 4 |
| odor | 2, 3, 4, 5 |
| ofaiin | 1, 2, 3, 5 |
| okody | 1, 2, 4, 5 |
And here's another interesting tidbit. If I strip the gallows from those hapax tokens, that decline flattens out.
Hapax matches to other scribes with Jaccard Overlap with gallows removed
| Pair | Matches | Jaccard Overlap |
|---|---|---|
| 1–2 | 35 | 3.80% |
| 1–3 | 21 | 3.05% |
| 1–4 | 19 | 3.11% |
| 1–5 | 16 | 2.74% |
| 2–3 | 32 | 4.93% |
| 2–4 | 22 | 3.79% |
| 2–5 | 23 | 4.18% |
| 3–4 | 8 | 2.31% |
| 3–5 | 15 | 4.82% |
| 4–5 | 10 | 4.22% |
2-10 count word matches to other scribes with Jaccard Overlap
| Rank | Pair | Shared Tokens | Jaccard Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3–5 | 40 | 15.87% |
| 2 | 2–3 | 81 | 12.27% |
| 3 | 1–2 | 107 | 11.33% |
| 4 | 4–5 | 15 | 10.07% |
| 5 | 1–3 | 61 | 8.96% |
| 6 | 3–4 | 22 | 7.80% |
| 7 | 1–4 | 38 | 6.60% |
| 8 | 2–4 | 32 | 5.51% |
| 9 | 1–5 | 21 | 3.61% |
| 10 | 2–5 | 18 | 3.09% |
Checking all unique words instead of low count words didn't affect that table much. But, through every test except hapax stripping, you can see the drop in similarity between scribe 1 and all the later scribes.
| Rank | Pair | Shared Tokens | Jaccard Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2–3 | 380 | 16.51% |
| 2 | 3–5 | 145 | 16.00% |
| 3 | 1–2 | 520 | 15.42% |
| 4 | 1–3 | 292 | 11.95% |
| 5 | 2–5 | 199 | 9.91% |
| 6 | 4–5 | 61 | 9.84% |
| 7 | 3–4 | 101 | 9.59% |
| 8 | 1–4 | 192 | 8.83% |
| 9 | 2–4 | 168 | 7.84% |
| 10 | 1–5 | 139 | 6.54% |

