Re: VMs: RE: RE: Best-fit 2-state PFSMs

[Dennis <tsalagi@xxxxxxxx>]

Nick Pelling wrote:

	Not necessarily regarding (P)FSM's,

> Really, I think that Voynichese is only superficially language-like, and 
> that it has an innate artificiality at its core. The idea behind 
> examining its structure by incrementing the number of target states is 
> to try to find a kind of transition point between the superficial 
> language-like structure and whatever lies beneath.
>
> >   Real languages apparently can't be
> > realistically modeled without very, very large FSMs, so if a drop like
> > this occurred, it may not happen until the FSM has hundreds of states.
> > The largest I've ever tried to generate was 120 states.

	What effect does the size of the text corpus have?  The HMM 
needed a text corpus of ~6 Mbyte for a clear result.  Would 
it tell us something to create an enormous synthetic 
Voynichese corpus by Gabriel or Jeff's method or Stolfi's 
Voynichese grammar and then analyze it?

> FWIW, I suspect the transition point will fall between 10 and 20 states 
> (for a pre-paired transcription set, such as one where qo / ol / or / al 
> / ar / iiii / iii / ii / eeee / eee / ee / dy / cfh / ckh / cph / cth / 
> ch / sh / eo / od all map to single tokens). For EVA, the PFSM finder 
> would also have to unpick all the tricky pairing rules correctly (lots 
> of local minima to avoid), so I guess 60+ states would be closer there.

	What about defining a transcription alphabet that treats 
these digraphs/verbose cipher elements as single glyphemes 
and then analyzing the VMs in that transcription?    That 
seems like a useful exercise.

Dennis


> Cheers, .....Nick Pelling.....
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
> unsubscribe vms-list

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