Re: VMs: Worry - information loss in transcription - pictures ...

[Nick Pelling <incoming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Rene,

> your E-mail is potentially interesting, but I can't
> quite follow it.
>
> > * Entropy of EVA = 221899 x 4.0 = 887596.00 bits
> > * Entropy of simple glyphs (+ ee) = 198098 x 4.08 =
> > 808239.84 bits
> > * Entropy of pair transcription (+ ee) = 155349 x
> > 4.36 = 677321.64 bits
>
> What's the 4.0 mean? And what about the 4.08?

4.0 / 4.08 / 4.36 are the h1 values (ie, the average number of bits per 
token) for each transcription. So, multiplying that figure by the number of 
token instances gives the (context-free) total size (in bits) of each 
transcription. Because the transcription changes the token count, it's 
important here to show the comparison in absolute terms (ie, number of 
bits) rather than in relative terms (ie, number of bits per token).

> You're looking at single-character entropy, which
> is a bit on the low side for the VMs, but it's
> the pair entropy (or the conditional single-
> character entropy) which is really anomalous.

That's next on my list... :-)

> > And isn't it strange how <o> and <y> are so common,
> > yet so very rarely
> > occur beside each other? Glyph transcription + ee +
> > oy + yo ==> (oy = 0.07%
> > and yo = 0.05%).
>
> This is precisely the origin of the low pair entropy.

I'm comfortable with <o> acting as a kind of "shift" character (because of 
or/ol/ok/ot etc) - even though that still fails to explain a large 
percentage of occurrences of <o>, but not quite so comfortable about 
positing the same thing for <y>. I wouldn't say these *are* the origin of 
the low pair entropy so much as they *point towards* the origin of it - but 
it'll take a bit of work to figure out what that origin is...

Cheers, .....Nick Pelling.....  


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