Method · exploratory/confirmatory splitConfirmation tests of S-006 candidates on the held-back half
Questions it answers
Runs and results 9 runs · 6 shown
| Run | Mystery | Measured | Result | Against | Date |
|---|
| RUN-247 | Voynich | Mean context similarity of word pairs sharing only their first glyph vs only their last (half C) | prefix 0.205 vs ending 0.197 (4252 / 11629 pairs) | Latin first letter 0.118 vs last 0.126 | 22 Oct |
| RUN-246 | Voynich | Repeat rate of whole-line class templates / line-initial class pairs vs words shuffled within page (half C; classes learned on half E) | lines 0.008 vs 0.007 (z 0.6); heads 0.917 vs 0.908 (z 9.0) | Latin: lines z 2.2 · heads z 2.5 | 22 Oct |
| RUN-245 | Voynich | Share of 1-2 glyph words by section, half C (recipe reading predicts recipes > herbal) | B 0.104; C 0.132; H 0.134; P 0.108; S 0.093; T 0.110 | | 22 Oct |
| RUN-244 | Voynich | Share of ol-initial words by section (v0.1 M-03 predicted astronomical and balneological highest), half C | B 0.086; C 0.053; H 0.024; P 0.040; S 0.042; T 0.059 | | 22 Oct |
| RUN-243 | Voynich | MI(first glyph; section) as a share of MI(word; section), half C | 0.094 | Latin first letter 0.033 | 22 Oct |
| RUN-242 | Voynich | Herbal pages (half C): first word unique to its page vs rest of first line | 0.71 vs 0.31 (n 62) | Latin same layout 0.18 vs 0.24 | 22 Oct |
Applied to
2 datasetsExploration split, ZL3b transcription
