Voynich Manuscript/Answer/ANS0D8FZZ4C2TD3

A published mechanical procedure produced it

Ruled out failed its test

One of the mechanical procedures proposed for the text - independent slot-grammar sampling, Timm-Schinner self-copying, Rugg's table and grille, a Naibbe-type affix-table cipher of Latin (plain or vowel-less), a Tranchedino-type homophonic cipher with nulls and re-spacing, a Trithemius-type word-for-letter table - reproduces the manuscript's held-out statistics once its free parameters are fitted on the training quires.

Files

data/analysis/framework/out/generators_scores.csv	6 KB	Open
data/analysis/framework/out/generators_fit.csv	587 B	Open
data/analysis/framework/out/generators_grid.csv	7 KB	Open
data/analysis/framework/out/generators_languages.csv	2 KB	Open

Links

answers	What procedure reproduces its statistics?	QST08JG6T5R6RRQ
against (from)	No simulated procedure reproduces the statistics	EVD0D8GDQ2G7EGT
tests (from)	Generator competition on a held-out fingerprint battery: held-out statistics failed per generator (\|z\|>2)	RUN0D8EPVPM7T4F
tests (from)	Generator competition on a held-out fingerprint battery: held-out statistics failed per generator (\|z\|>2)	RUN0D8EPWNW56PD
tests (from)	Generator competition on a held-out fingerprint battery: nearest generator to the manuscript in standardised held-out space	RUN0D8EPVET6244
tests (from)	Generator competition on a held-out fingerprint battery: nearest generator to the manuscript in standardised held-out space	RUN0D8EPWE20XPZ

Kind: hypothesis
Stage: tested
Tests: ["T15-generators"]
Family: PROCESS
Origin: literature
Result: No generator passes more than two of twelve held-out statistics. The affix-table cipher with large tables (60 prefixes and 60 suffixes per unit, 60 % bigram units) is nearest on the fitted statistics (h2 2.63, TTR 0.24, hapax 0.58) and reproduces the weak word order (gain 0.00 vs 0.40; held-out bigram -0.31 vs -0.12), but has no page locality (z 1.9 vs 16), no form-function coupling (0.04 vs 0.15) and no edge-glyph dependency (0.008 vs 0.21 bits). Self-copying reproduces near-twin rates and the nearest-neighbour share but over-generates order (2.9 bits) and lacks locality. The re-spaced homophonic stream alone reproduces the edge-glyph dependency (0.22). No procedure reproduces the line-initial effects, which all lack by construction. Languages laid out in the same pages give page locality z 10-20 and edge MI 0.04-0.29, both of which the manuscript matches.
Predictions: ["for the true procedure", "the manuscript\u0027s value of each held-out statistic (word-order gain", "held-out bigram gain", "glyph context gain", "form-function coupling", "repeated 3- and 4-grams", "near-twin rates", "page locality", "edge-glyph mutual information", "line-initial divergence) falls inside the spread of 20 simulated corpora written into the manuscript\u0027s own layout"]
Ledger status: not-supported

In the research Session 7: Phase 3: procedures, fragments, lists, transliteration; book v1.2Proposed

History

v1 · 25 Oct 2026 · Voynich Manuscript: sync from the research ledger

0a1b11aacf650af94bd9814891b26f1cd1cc860ea6650d6ba570e322758cdf0c