New research paper

[Digitalgoldfish79]

Instead of just stating that Chi-squared and Fisher tests on the data showed a lack of independence and randomness it would have been useful to present some definite examples from the manuscript. In order for us to judge whether you have applied these methods correctly you really do need to give us more of your calculations.

My own efforts to apply statistical hypothesis testing techniques on the text of the manuscript has raised many anomalies. A lot of data is many standard deviations away from what would be expected. It just highlights what we know already, that the text is irregular and doesn't have an easy explanation.

Thank you.. that's actually helpful critique..

---

[quote="Digitalgoldfish79" pid='74463' dateline='1763906309']
I hadn't realised how paranoid everyone was about AI... I'm head of digital and AI for a bank and we have teams of people using it every day to write code and do statistics.. this is all pretty normal to me...

Using AI for research is normal (not always beneficial, but this is another question). Creating something with AI and just putting it in a paper and giving it for people to read, without checking if the graphs make sense first, looks like a waste of everybody's time to me. Do you agree with this?
[/quote

Yes, that I agree with, and it was a rookie error