Re: VMs: Can one "prove" a hoax? - and a request.

["Robert Antony Hicks" <rob_hicks_vms@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

The initial problem, when it comes to proving a that a text is randomly 
generated, is to identify the different types of generation possible.  Then, 
if characteristics, patterns and structures within each type of generation 
can be described, we can look for similar patterns within the VMS.  As a 
start, the following possible types of generation leap to mind -

a) Generated by some sort of randomiser and algorithm
  (e.g. a dice and a set of letter frequency tables).

  a(i) At a single-letter level.
  a(ii) At a bigraph level.
  a(iii) At a trigraph, etc, level.
  a(iv) At a single word level.
  a(iv) At a dual-word level.
  a(v) At a triple, etc, word level.
  a(vi) At a sentence level.

b) Generated by the conscious mind of the hoaxer
  (e.g. an attempt to make what 'looks' like language).
  Consistency of syntax and 'grammar' may be apparent.


  b(i) Deliberately resembling, or based upon, an existing language.
  b(ii) An 'imaginary' language.

c) Generated by the unconscious mind of the hoaxer
  (e.g. glossalalia, 'spirit' writing).

  c(i) Unintentionally resembling, or based upon, an existing
       language.
  c(ii) An 'imaginary' language.


Can anybody expand on this list, or come up with tests for any of the 
categories?

Rob


_________________________________________________________________
Chat online in real time with MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.co.uk

______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list