There's a new paper on the VM at You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.:

Quote:You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
September 2020
 

The Voynich Manuscript is a 15th Century illustrated cipher manuscript. In this overview of recent approaches to the Voynich manuscript, we summarize and evaluate current work on the language that underlies this document. We provide arguments for treating the document as natural language (rather than a medieval hoax) and show how we can make statistical arguments about the phonology, morphology, and structure of the document, even though the contents remain undecipherable.

Although trying the mirror was probably the first step for many of us on our Voynich exploration path, I like the approach. And fig. 12a is indeed interesting.

"The mysteries of life becoming clearer
Behind the mirror"

Full text is available here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

In this article, which imho is definitely worth a read.

    "An Application of PTAH to the Voynich Manuscript by Mary E. D'Imperio"

D'Imperio discusses anaylsis of the VMS using the PTAH statistical method  but "The technique itself and its uses are classified"

One reference is "R. L. Cave and L. P. Neuwirth. "Hidden Markov Models of English, 1969"

So it appears the from the article that PTAH is some kind of Hidden Markov Model with additional bells and whistles.

Doing some quick SE checks around the web hoping the NSA may have declassified PTAH revealed nothing.

I was wondering if anyone knows anything about PTAH ?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(yes i know - this is something that someone has already mentioned and someone else has already proved it statistically wrong - damn! i hope someone burn this cursed manuscript...!)

Sometimes I notice something that may not be worth its own thread. This thread is for such things. If interesting discussions develop, I can always split off posts.

Like... does this nymph have three breasts like the lady in Total Recall? 

   

Meanwhile there are works which refer directly to the publications of Cheshire. Here a paper as an example:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Quote:This study made use of Dr. Cheshire’s work and analysis of Folios 1v - 6r in his ten paper series of the Voynich Manuscript. We would like to thank him for reviewing our paper and provide wonderful feedback.

Here's Froggie the frog (f101v1):

I think this is the only realistic animal depiction in the VM.
What concordance can we see with other era-similar manuscripts?

There sure are a lot of researchers who come and go who are not at all missed. But which ones who've come and apparently gone do you wish had stuck around?

Jorge Stolfi is apparently no longer involved with VMs research, but his ghost is still very much present here. I was not involved in the VMs scene when he was active, but from what I can gather from current discussion, Stolfi's work is the equivalent of what's known as a "sleeper hit" in the movie industry: lukewarmly received upon its first release, but gradually more appreciated with time. I also compare Stolfi's "presence in his absence" to the character of John Galt in Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged. In both cases, the man's absence is controversial and regarded bitterly, because it is case-in-point of a systemic problem which drove him away, and could very well drive other great people away too. Again, I don't have a dog in this fight, I'm only echoing what I have picked up over a couple of years of reading this forum and feeling the vibes here. For what it's worth, I really enjoyed Jorge Stolfi's webpage, and I come back to sections of it, looking for inspiration. But I have the advantage of hindsight; I would like to say that I would have been one of Stolfi's supporters against his critics when he first published his work, but I don't know because I wasn't there. It would be really awesome if Prof Stolfi were to resurface, comment on some of the more recent developments in VMs studies, and pick up where he left off with his work on the text.

What other VMs researchers do you sorely miss, and wish would come back and continue working on the manuscript and offering their thoughts?

Just read on FB that the new C14 calibration curve for Northern hemisphere has been released, named IntCal20.

So I wonder whether that would introduce any changes into the VMS dating results (most probably it would not).

I note that Jaskiewicz attempted to soften the errors brought about by use of differing alphabets in his paper linked below:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Specifically, he altered this equation for letter frequency comparison:

   

to this (with accompanying text included to explain):

   

What are the thoughts about this kind of change?  Is it a valid way to overcome the use of varied alphabets?  Would an alteration such as this help the work that Darren is doing (see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)?

I understand that letter frequency analysis is likely quite different from the hyper vector work in the other thread, but the underlying problem seems similar to me.   I wondered if the parallel issue might have a parallel solution (and also wondered what other more mathematically minded board members might think of this approach).

I apologize in advance if this is a naive question, but I am working on my ability to evaluate these kinds of publications more critically and appreciate any input others would be willing to share.