Semantic Novelty at Scale: Narrative Shape Taxonomy and Readership Prediction in 28,606 Books

I apply Schmidhuber's compression progress theory of interestingness at corpus scale, analyzing semantic novelty trajectories in more than 80,000 books spanning two centuries of English-language publishing. Using sentence-transformer paragraph embeddings and a running-centroid novelty measure, I compare 28,730 pre-1920 Project Gutenberg books (PG19) against 52,796 modern English books (Books3, approximately 1990-2010). The principal findings are fourfold. First, mean paragraph-level novelty is roughly 10% higher in modern books (0.503 vs. 0.459). Second, trajectory circuitousness -- the ratio of cumulative path length to net displacement in embedding space -- nearly doubles in the modern corpus (+67%). Third, convergent narrative curves, in which novelty declines toward a settled semantic register, are 2.3x more common in pre-1920 literature. Fourth, novelty is orthogonal to reader quality ratings (r = -0.002), suggesting that interestingness in Schmidhuber's sense is structurally independent of perceived literary merit. Clustering paragraph-level trajectories via PAA-16 representations reveals eight distinct narrative-shape archetypes whose distribution shifts substantially between eras. All analysis code and an interactive exploration toolkit are publicly available at https://bigfivekiller.online/novelty_hub.

We test whether authors have characteristic "fingerprints" in the information-theoretic novelty curves of their published works. Working with two corpora -- Books3 (52,796 books, 759 qualifying authors) and PG-19 (28,439 books, 1,821 qualifying authors) -- we find that authorial voice leaves measurable traces in how novelty unfolds across a text. The signal is multi-scale: at book level, scalar dynamics (mean novelty, speed, volume, circuitousness) identify 43% of authors significantly above chance; at chapter level, SAX motif patterns in sliding windows achieve 30x-above-chance attribution, far exceeding the scalar features that dominate at book level. These signals are complementary, not redundant. We show that the fingerprint is partly confounded with genre but persists within-genre for approximately one-quarter of authors. Classical authors (Twain, Austen, Kipling) show fingerprints comparable in strength to modern authors, suggesting the phenomenon is not an artifact of contemporary publishing conventions.

While large language models can generate entire novels, there is little information about the level of formal variation in their output over many generations. Rather than asking whether individual passages can be identified as AI-generated, this study asks whether repeated AI generation can produce the same range of diversity which is found across human corpora. This paper contrasts six corpora based on generation source and target style: twenty novels generated using GPT-5.5 Thinking in a nineteenth-century British realist style, twenty novels generated using Qwen3-14B in a nineteenth-century British realist style, twenty novels generated using each of these models in a contemporary zero style, 205 nineteenth-century human-written British novels, and sixty-five contemporary human-written Zero-Style novels. At the document level, the research includes MATTR-500, Shannon entropy, average sentence length, readability, and punctuation rate measurements. The most robust and reliable result is compression of sentence structure. Repeated generations produce novels that vary far less from one another in sentence structure than human novels do. Compression is also present in the measures of readability, punctuation, and sentence length variability within novels. Lexical measures tend to be similarly compressed, with the exception of Qwen Zero-Style MATTR. Despite having distinct mean stylistic profiles, GPT and Qwen lack a stable pattern of cross-measure correlation. This article therefore distinguishes between variance overclosure, which represents a limited formal range between novels, and a more specific phenomenon of correlational overclosure. This means that an individual AI-generated novel may resemble human fiction stylistically, while a collection of AI-generated novels occupies a much narrower formal range.