xeno6696: "But did you account for multiple, parallel, simultaneous trials?<--If you answer nothing, answer that. As a computer scientist I&apos;m well aware of the power of an exponential growth of adding "processors" to a problem. The impossible becomes probable. The probable becomes likely. The likely becomes routine."

I used a conventional analysis. Statistics are not my strong point, and I try to use only those tools I understand.

I have seen computer models where books and phrases are "randomly" written by measuring the random code generated by a "measure of correctness" (i.e. the answer your looking for). I find this approach conceptually flawed, however I don&apos;t know anything about the techniques that you mentioned so I cannot venture a comment about the appropriateness of their use in resolving this problem.