On the Non-Specificity of Statistical Measures Used in Script Decipherment

Whether the Indus Valley sign system (c. 2600-1900 BCE) encodes spoken language has been debated for decades. This paper introduces a multi-metric discrimination framework that tests the observed Indus corpus against two kinds of computer-generated non-linguistic baseline -- one mimicking a heraldic emblem system, the other an administrative coding system -- each calibrated with Zipfian frequency distributions, positional constraints, and bigram dependencies derived from six attested non-linguistic corpora. The scorecard evaluates four properties central to the Farmer-Sproat-Witzel (2004) critique: text brevity, repeated formulaic phrases, hapax legomenon rate, and positional rigidity. Applying this framework to 1,916 deduplicated inscriptions (584 unique signs, 11,110 tokens) from the ICIT/Yajnadevam digitization, we find that the Indus corpus does not match either baseline cleanly. Across the four metrics examined, the Indus corpus occupies an intermediate position relative to the two baseline families, matching neither cleanly. Neither a heraldic nor an administrative generator can reproduce all four properties at once. We also compare against seven real-world non-linguistic corpora including Sproat's (2014) datasets, finding that no attested non-linguistic system reproduces the full Indus statistical profile either. We replicate key prior results including a Zipf slope of -1.49 and conditional entropy of 3.23 bits. All code and data are publicly available.

The decipherment of historical encrypted manuscripts poses a fundamental challenge in Digital Humanities: before any transcription can begin, the symbol inventory of the underlying cipher alphabet must first be identified and characterized. We address this challenge through symbol spotting: given a candidate alphabet specified as a set of rendered font glyphs, the task is to determine whether and where its characters appear in an unseen handwritten document, without any labeled examples from the target script. The main difficulty lies in the domain gap between clean, digitally rendered font queries and degraded handwritten manuscript symbols. We propose a three-stage pipeline that bridges this gap without manual annotation, combining a joint SimCLR+DANN encoder for domain-invariant glyph representations with an embedding-space style-adaptation mechanism applied at retrieval time, requiring no re-training. Experiments on fourteen pages from seven encrypted manuscript collections show that our method outperforms zero-shot foundation models, including CLIP and DINOv2, by a large margin ($+0.194$ P@1 over CLIP ViT-L/14), and surpasses task-specific trained baselines by $+0.138$ P@1. We further demonstrate that the Raw-Cover metric, computed in a fully unsupervised setting, provides a meaningful script-family fingerprint that identifies the underlying alphabet of an unknown document. This capability is of direct practical relevance to palaeographers, historians, and other researchers working with undeciphered manuscripts.

More than a billion people communicate in Indic languages, yet the natural language processing infrastructure serving them remains fragmented and underdeveloped. The cause is structural: the field organizes its tools and benchmarks around individual languages or small subsets of genealogical language families, building separate analyzers, parsers, and datasets for each language and starting over for the next. This overlooks a deep regularity. Through more than two millennia of convergence around Sanskrit, Indic languages came to share a morphosyntactic architecture formalized in Pānini's grammar, the Astādhyāyī. This cuts across genealogical lines, uniting languages through a common framework. We argue that this Pāninian framework supplies a unifying computational architecture the field has lacked, and that benchmarks grounded explicitly in it would make Indic language systems more accurate, more data-efficient, and more transferable, effectively merging many apparently disparate and sparse Indic language resources into a single high-resource metalanguage bedrock. We propose a four-part benchmark suite to render this shared architecture explicit, measurable, and ready to be leveraged for practical applications. Moreover, we underscore the question it raises for interpretability research: whether neural models trained on these languages come to represent Pānini's categories on their own.