Re: On the word length distribution

[Rene Zandbergen <rene@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Stolfi's succinct discussion of his word length analysis is truly
fascinating.
There are many ways in which a binomial word length distribution could
be the result of some 'chance' process like tossing a coin.
This would go a long way towards explaining the paradox highlighted in
my 'digraph entrpy vs. word entropy' page. And one or two other things.

Jorge, do I understand correctly that you used the Currier alphabet 'as
is'?
This is of course a bit of a problem since it seems reasonable to assume
that
the strings of C's should perhaps not represent multiple characters (or,

conversely, the strings of I's should).  And the peculiar role of
word-initial
4 is problematic too. Not by itself, but due to the fact that is is
essentially
always followed by an O. If the close fit vanishes if one uses the
FSG alphabet (ignore Eva in this context), then the 'coincidence option'

gains some ground.

This is definitely worth a much closer look.

Cheers, Rene