Well, I opened your code and a few things jump out at me..
One is that this isn't an incorrect image being inserted into your paper, your python code is literally generating the sine wave:
lista_densita = []
for x in lista_pagine:
valore = np.sin(x/5.0) + 1.5 + (spacing_offset/1000.0)
lista_densita.append(valore)
That's in your plotting all missing spatial.py file.
Second, your scripts aren't opening a transcription of VMS that I can see at all... The python you shipped is using small sample data you hard coded inside the script. Here's your hyper repetition logistic.py:
matrice_x = np.array([
[1, 0, 0, 1],
[0, 1, 1, 0],
[1, 1, 0, 0],
[0, 0, 1, 1]
])
vettore_y = np.array([1, 0, 1, 0])
That's it, it's just 4 lines of data, there's no file being opened heree. This just defines that x y label, then opens that small 4-line sample, then prints the coefficient from that 4-line sample.
Third thing is your code here doesn't match the calls in the paper, the scripts are all looking like toy demos which I guess explains why they aren't opening a transcription file.
And I think I see why, your script has c:/LAVORI_ANTIGRAVITY/PAPER_ACCADEMICO_COMPLETO/ hardcoded at the top. This path is almost certainly where your real data and the real scripts used to run all this. I infer you're using Google Antigravity AI coding IDE (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) for this based on the path name.
Two things that would clear this up in your Zenodo rep, one is just upload the real scripts from the ANTIGRAVITY folder to your Zenodo repo, and the second is you might want to get out ahead of describing your AI use, I don't think people necessarily have a problem with it (Antigravity is a faster coding agent than anyone manually) but between that and the AI-style jargon it's maybe detracting a bit from you trying to make a point about doublets and page vocabulary profiles.
In conclusion: that's the spine of it, not just spitballing. A real observation. That's the whole thing. Notice the arc of what just happened. One honest caveat. Genuinely. Honestly. Quietly. This is doing real work. Now we're pushing up against the part that matters most. But I want to pause here, because it's worth stating clearly-this is exactly the kind of load-bearing analysis that quietly powers your entire argument...
One is that this isn't an incorrect image being inserted into your paper, your python code is literally generating the sine wave:
lista_densita = []
for x in lista_pagine:
valore = np.sin(x/5.0) + 1.5 + (spacing_offset/1000.0)
lista_densita.append(valore)
That's in your plotting all missing spatial.py file.
Second, your scripts aren't opening a transcription of VMS that I can see at all... The python you shipped is using small sample data you hard coded inside the script. Here's your hyper repetition logistic.py:
matrice_x = np.array([
[1, 0, 0, 1],
[0, 1, 1, 0],
[1, 1, 0, 0],
[0, 0, 1, 1]
])
vettore_y = np.array([1, 0, 1, 0])
That's it, it's just 4 lines of data, there's no file being opened heree. This just defines that x y label, then opens that small 4-line sample, then prints the coefficient from that 4-line sample.
Third thing is your code here doesn't match the calls in the paper, the scripts are all looking like toy demos which I guess explains why they aren't opening a transcription file.
And I think I see why, your script has c:/LAVORI_ANTIGRAVITY/PAPER_ACCADEMICO_COMPLETO/ hardcoded at the top. This path is almost certainly where your real data and the real scripts used to run all this. I infer you're using Google Antigravity AI coding IDE (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) for this based on the path name.
Two things that would clear this up in your Zenodo rep, one is just upload the real scripts from the ANTIGRAVITY folder to your Zenodo repo, and the second is you might want to get out ahead of describing your AI use, I don't think people necessarily have a problem with it (Antigravity is a faster coding agent than anyone manually) but between that and the AI-style jargon it's maybe detracting a bit from you trying to make a point about doublets and page vocabulary profiles.
In conclusion: that's the spine of it, not just spitballing. A real observation. That's the whole thing. Notice the arc of what just happened. One honest caveat. Genuinely. Honestly. Quietly. This is doing real work. Now we're pushing up against the part that matters most. But I want to pause here, because it's worth stating clearly-this is exactly the kind of load-bearing analysis that quietly powers your entire argument...
(09-07-2026, 06:46 PM)eggyk wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Why is the double word density a basic sine wave? Surely that's not right?
vs in your previous thread:
Perhaps I have misunderstood something. I don't understand 90% of the jargon in the paper.
(09-07-2026, 07:22 PM)Vuk88 wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.@Eggyk
You're completely right, it's a huge mistake. I haven't slept in a couple of days and I made a total mess.
In the first draft I wanted to redo the graph to make it cleaner, and that sine wave is literally just the test trace I used for the script to calibrate the alignment with the missing pages.
I eventually decided not to use it because the one with the raw spikes was visually better. Then I messed up renaming the draft file and accidentally put the test image in the paper too...
I'm removing it from the paper right now.
Thank you so much for pointing it out right away.
Sorry for the misunderstanding