[Mova](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/hbo-2024-faigenbaum-golovin-critical-biblical-studies-word-frequency/)

[home](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [docs](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/) / [papers](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/) / [Ancient Hebrew](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/hbo/) / Critical biblical studies via word frequency analysis: unveiling text authorship

# Critical biblical studies via word frequency analysis: unveiling text authorship

**Authors:** Shira Faigenbaum-Golovin, Alon Kipnis, Axel Bühler, Eli Piasetzky, Thomas Römer, Israel Finkelstein · **Year:** 2024 · **Venue:** arXiv 2410.19883 **Link:** [arxiv.org/abs/2410.19883](https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.19883) · **Licence:** copyrighted — summary only (arXiv non-exclusive licence)

[**1** citations in our library](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/cited-by/hbo-2024-faigenbaum-golovin-critical-biblical-studies-word-frequency/) of the 140673 papers whose bibliographies we readarXiv:2410.19883[licence](http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/)

- [Publisher's page](https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.19883)
- [PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2410.19883)
- [arXiv 2410.19883](https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.19883)

**Authors (6)**

1. Shira Faigenbaum-Golovin
2. Alon Kipnis
3. Axel Buhler
4. Eli Piasetzky
5. Thomas Romer
6. Israel Finkelstein

Citations and author metrics from OpenAlex (); authors with the same name are not always told apart.

## What it is about

Fifty chapters whose source is broadly agreed (old Deuteronomy D, the Deuteronomistic History DtrH in Joshua–Kings, and Priestly texts P in Genesis–Leviticus) are turned into lemma counts using OSHB's lemma numbers, with all proper names collapsed to one code and gentilics to another. Two word-frequency tables are compared by Higher Criticism (Kipnis–Donoho): many two-sample binomial tests, one per lemma, combined so the score is sensitive to a few words that deviate strongly, with no word list chosen in advance. In leave-one-out tests only 2 of 50 chapters are wrongly rejected from their corpus, and attribution to the closest corpus is right for 84% (P 95%, D 78%, DtrH 72%); D and DtrH sit close, P apart. Accuracy depends on length: under 10 verses it is poor, 10–30 verses about 80%. The method names the discriminating lemmas behind each decision and is then applied to disputed texts (Deut 4, Lev 26, Gen 14–15, 20, 22, 24, and others).

## Ideas

- I1. Implement the HC discrepancy in Rust over the Torah trees' lemmas (BTreeMap counts, names → `<Np>`, gentilics → `<Ng>`): a deterministic, explainable text-comparison measure that reports which lemmas made the difference. Fits Mova's "say why" rule.
- I2. Use it inside the Torah to profile registers rather than authors: law (Lev 1–7, Deut 12–26), building instructions (Ex 25–31, 35–40), genealogy, narrative. The discriminating lemmas become genre cues for `prag` and for the discourse chapter's genre section.
- I3. Reproduce the paper's Torah-side numbers on our lemmatisation (P chapters Gen 1, 17; Ex 6, 16, 25–31, 35–40; Lev 1–3, 8–9 vs D chapters Deut 6, 12–13, 15–16, 18–19, 26, 28) as a check that our lemma column matches OSHB's; differences point to converter or segmentation defects.
- I4. The length curve (attribution unreliable under 10 verses) is a rule of thumb for any Mova statistic over passages: report the passage length with the score and refuse a verdict below a threshold.

## For Mova

I1 is a small Rust module beside the parse database (or `macula`) with its own negative control (shuffled chapters must score as same-source). I2 feeds [Discourse: narrative, speech and the shape of a text](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/languages/hbo/09-discourse/) (genres) and candidate genre cues in `tools/macula/src/prag.rs`. I3 is a check reported in `13-mova-tools.md`; I4 is a convention for every measure there. Mova takes no side on source criticism; the corpora are only a labelled test.

## Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. [arXiv 2410.19883](https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.19883)

```
@misc{faigenbaumgolovin2024critical,
  title = {{Critical biblical studies via word frequency analysis: unveiling text authorship}},
  author = {Faigenbaum-Golovin, Shira and Kipnis, Alon and Buhler, Axel and Piasetzky, Eli and Romer, Thomas and Finkelstein, Israel},
  year = {2024},
  eprint = {2410.19883},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.19883}
}
```

- [← previous The End of Desire: On the Meaning of תשוקה in the Hebrew Scriptures and the Dead Sea Scrolls](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/hbo-2024-condren-end-desire-meaning-hebrew-scriptures/)
- [next → The Sale of Joseph in Genesis 37:18–26: Narrative Cohesion and Coherence](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/hbo-2024-mcaffee-sale-joseph-genesis-37-1826/)
- [↑ back to Ancient Hebrew](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/hbo/)

## References

65 references, 3 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Schniedewind, W. M., How the Bible Became a Book: The Textualization of Ancient Israel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Schniedewind%2C+W%2E+M%2E%2C+How+the+Bible+Became+a+Book%3A+The+Textualization+of+Ancient+Israel+%28Cambridge%3A+Cambridge+University+Press%3B+2004%2E)
2. Kratz, R. G., The composition of the Narrative Books of the Old Testament (A&C Black); 2005. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Kratz%2C+R%2E+G%2E%2C+The+composition+of+the+Narrative+Books+of+the+Old+Testament+%28A%26C+Black%29%3B+2005%2E)
3. Schmid, K., The Old Testament: A Literary History (Fortress Press); 2012. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Schmid%2C+K%2E%2C+The+Old+Testament%3A+A+Literary+History+%28Fortress+Press%29%3B+2012%2E)
4. R ö mer, T., The so-called Deuteronomistic history: a sociological, historical and literary introduction (London); 2005. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=R+%C3%B6+mer%2C+T%2E%2C+The+so%2Dcalled+Deuteronomistic+history%3A+a+sociological%2C+historical+and+literary+introduction+%28London%29%3B+2005%2E)
5. Finkelstein, I., Essays on biblical historiography: from Jeroboam II to John Hyrcanus I. Essays on Biblical historiography. 2022; 1–601. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Finkelstein%2C+I%2E%2C+Essays+on+biblical+historiography%3A+from+Jeroboam+II+to+John+Hyrcanus+I%2E+Essays+on+Biblical+historiography%2E+2022%3B+1%E2%80%93601%2E)
6. Stamatatos, E. A survey of modern authorship attribution methods. J. Am. Soc. for information Sci. Technol.; 2009; 60 (32):538-556. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Stamatatos%2C+E%2E+A+survey+of+modern+authorship+attribution+methods%2E+J%2E+Am%2E+Soc%2E+for+information+Sci%2E+Technol%2E%3B+2009%3B+60+%2832%29%3A538%2D556%2E)
7. Swain, S., Mishra, G., & Sindhu, C., Recent approaches on authorship attribution techniques—An overview. In 2017 Int. Conf. of Electronics, Communication and Aerospace Technology, 2017; 1:557-566. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Swain%2C+S%2E%2C+Mishra%2C+G%2E%2C+%26+Sindhu%2C+C%2E%2C+Recent+approaches+on+authorship+attribution+techniques%E2%80%94An+overview%2E+In+2017+Int%2E+Conf%2E+of+Electronics%2C+Communication+and+Aerospace+Technology%2C+2017%3B+1%3A557%2D566%2E)
8. Tyo, J., Dhingra, B., & Lipton, Z. C., Valla: Standardizing and Benchmarking Authorship Attribution and Verification Through Empirical Evaluation and Comparative Analysis. In Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing and the 3rd Conference of the Asia-Pacific Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 2023; 649-660. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Tyo%2C+J%2E%2C+Dhingra%2C+B%2E%2C+%26+Lipton%2C+Z%2E+C%2E%2C+Valla%3A+Standardizing+and+Benchmarking+Authorship+Attribution+and+Verification+Through+Empirical+Evaluation+and+Comparative+Analysis%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+13th+I)
9. Portnoy, S. L., Petersen, D. L., Biblical texts and statistical analysis: Zechariah and beyond. J. Biblical Lit. 1984; 103:11–21. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Portnoy%2C+S%2E+L%2E%2C+Petersen%2C+D%2E+L%2E%2C+Biblical+texts+and+statistical+analysis%3A+Zechariah+and+beyond%2E+J%2E+Biblical+Lit%2E+1984%3B+103%3A11%E2%80%9321%2E)
10. Holmes, D. I., Authorship attribution. Comput. Humanit. 1994; 28:87–106. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Holmes%2C+D%2E+I%2E%2C+Authorship+attribution%2E+Comput%2E+Humanit%2E+1994%3B+28%3A87%E2%80%93106%2E)
11. Stamatatos, E., A survey of modern authorship attribution methods. J. Am. Soc. for information Sci. Technol. 2009; 60:538–556. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Stamatatos%2C+E%2E%2C+A+survey+of+modern+authorship+attribution+methods%2E+J%2E+Am%2E+Soc%2E+for+information+Sci%2E+Technol%2E+2009%3B+60%3A538%E2%80%93556%2E)
12. Jockers, M. L., Witten, D. M., A comparative study of machine learning methods for authorship attribution. Lit. Linguist. Comput. 2010; 25:215–223. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jockers%2C+M%2E+L%2E%2C+Witten%2C+D%2E+M%2E%2C+A+comparative+study+of+machine+learning+methods+for+authorship+attribution%2E+Lit%2E+Linguist%2E+Comput%2E+2010%3B+25%3A215%E2%80%93223%2E)
13. Neal, T., Sundararajan, K., Fatima, A., Yan, Y., Xiang, Y., & Woodard, D, Surveying stylometry techniques and applications. ACM Computing Surveys (CSuR), 2017; 50(6):1-36. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Neal%2C+T%2E%2C+Sundararajan%2C+K%2E%2C+Fatima%2C+A%2E%2C+Yan%2C+Y%2E%2C+Xiang%2C+Y%2E%2C+%26+Woodard%2C+D%2C+Surveying+stylometry+techniques+and+applications%2E+ACM+Computing+Surveys+%28CSuR%29%2C+2017%3B+50%286%29%3A1%2D36%2E)
14. Koppel, M. Akiva, N., Dershowitz, I., Dershowitz, N., Unsupervised decomposition of a document into authorial components in Proc. of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. 2011; 1356–1364. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Koppel%2C+M%2E+Akiva%2C+N%2E%2C+Dershowitz%2C+I%2E%2C+Dershowitz%2C+N%2E%2C+Unsupervised+decomposition+of+a+document+into+authorial+components+in+Proc%2E+of+the+49th+Annual+Meeting+of+the+Association+for+Computational+Lingui) [our card](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/aclbulk-2011-koppel-unsupervised-decomposition-document-into-authorial/)
15. Dershowitz, I., Akiva, N., Koppel, M., Dershowitz, N., Computerized source criticism of biblical texts. J. Biblical Lit. 2015; 134:253–271. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Dershowitz%2C+I%2E%2C+Akiva%2C+N%2E%2C+Koppel%2C+M%2E%2C+Dershowitz%2C+N%2E%2C+Computerized+source+criticism+of+biblical+texts%2E+J%2E+Biblical+Lit%2E+2015%3B+134%3A253%E2%80%93271%2E)
16. Yoffe, Gideon, Axel Bühler, Nachum Dershowitz, Israel Finkelstein, Eli Piasetzky, Thomas Römer, and Barak Sober. “A Statistical Exploration of Text Partition into Constituents: The Case of the Priestly Source in the Books of Genesis and Exodus.” Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 2023; 1918–40. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Yoffe%2C+Gideon%2C+Axel+B%C3%BChler%2C+Nachum+Dershowitz%2C+Israel+Finkelstein%2C+Eli+Piasetzky%2C+Thomas+R%C3%B6mer%2C+and+Barak+Sober%2E+%E2%80%9CA+Statistical+Exploration+of+Text+Partition+into+Constituents%3A+The+Case+of+the+Priestl)
17. Bühler, Axel, Gideon Yoffe, Nachum Dershowitz, Eli Piasetzky, Israel Finkelstein, Thomas Römer, and Barak Sober. “Exploring the Stylistic Uniqueness of the Priestly Source in Genesis and Exodus Through a Statistical/Computational Lens.” Zeitschrift Für Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft. 2024; 136 (2): 165–90. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=B%C3%BChler%2C+Axel%2C+Gideon+Yoffe%2C+Nachum+Dershowitz%2C+Eli+Piasetzky%2C+Israel+Finkelstein%2C+Thomas+R%C3%B6mer%2C+and+Barak+Sober%2E+%E2%80%9CExploring+the+Stylistic+Uniqueness+of+the+Priestly+Source+in+Genesis+and+Exodus+Throug)
18. Stamatatos, E., et al., Overview of the authorship verification task at PAN 2022. In CEUR workshop proceedings 2022; 3180:2301-2313. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Stamatatos%2C+E%2E%2C+et+al%2E%2C+Overview+of+the+authorship+verification+task+at+PAN+2022%2E+In+CEUR+workshop+proceedings+2022%3B+3180%3A2301%2D2313%2E)
19. Xia, S. A. Genre analysis in the digital era: Developments and challenges. ESP Today, 8(1), 2020:141-159. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Xia%2C+S%2E+A%2E+Genre+analysis+in+the+digital+era%3A+Developments+and+challenges%2E+ESP+Today%2C+8%281%29%2C+2020%3A141%2D159%2E)
20. Shrestha, P., Sierra, S., González, F. A., Montes, M., Rosso, P., & Solorio, T. Convolutional neural networks for authorship attribution of short texts in Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 2017: 2: 669–674. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Shrestha%2C+P%2E%2C+Sierra%2C+S%2E%2C+Gonz%C3%A1lez%2C+F%2E+A%2E%2C+Montes%2C+M%2E%2C+Rosso%2C+P%2E%2C+%26+Solorio%2C+T%2E+Convolutional+neural+networks+for+authorship+attribution+of+short+texts+in+Proceedings+of+the+15th+Conference+of+the+Eur)
21. Wang, L., News authorship identification with deep learning in Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum, Portugal 2016. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Wang%2C+L%2E%2C+News+authorship+identification+with+deep+learning+in+Conference+and+Labs+of+the+Evaluation+Forum%2C+Portugal+2016%2E)
22. Kipnis, A., Higher criticism for discriminating word-frequency tables and authorship attribution. The Annals Appl. Stat. 2022; 16:1236–1252. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Kipnis%2C+A%2E%2C+Higher+criticism+for+discriminating+word%2Dfrequency+tables+and+authorship+attribution%2E+The+Annals+Appl%2E+Stat%2E+2022%3B+16%3A1236%E2%80%931252%2E)
23. Kipnis, A., Donoho, D. L., Two-sample testing of discrete distributions under rare/weak perturbations in IEEE Int. Sym. on Inf. Theory (ISIT) 2021; 3314–3319. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Kipnis%2C+A%2E%2C+Donoho%2C+D%2E+L%2E%2C+Two%2Dsample+testing+of+discrete+distributions+under+rare%2Fweak+perturbations+in+IEEE+Int%2E+Sym%2E+on+Inf%2E+Theory+%28ISIT%29+2021%3B+3314%E2%80%933319%2E)
24. Donoho, D. L., Kipnis, A., Higher criticism to compare two large frequency tables, with sensitivity to possible rare and weak differences. The Annals Stat. 2022; 50:1447–1472. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Donoho%2C+D%2E+L%2E%2C+Kipnis%2C+A%2E%2C+Higher+criticism+to+compare+two+large+frequency+tables%2C+with+sensitivity+to+possible+rare+and+weak+differences%2E+The+Annals+Stat%2E+2022%3B+50%3A1447%E2%80%931472%2E)
25. Donoho, D. L., Jin, J., sample testing of discrete distributions under rare/weak pertuxtures. The Annals Stat. 2004; 32:962–994. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Donoho%2C+D%2E+L%2E%2C+Jin%2C+J%2E%2C+sample+testing+of+discrete+distributions+under+rare%2Fweak+pertuxtures%2E+The+Annals+Stat%2E+2004%3B+32%3A962%E2%80%93994%2E)
26. Donoho, D. L., Jin, J., Higher criticism for large-scale inference, especially for rare and weak effects. Stat. Sci. 2015; 30(1):1-25. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Donoho%2C+D%2E+L%2E%2C+Jin%2C+J%2E%2C+Higher+criticism+for+large%2Dscale+inference%2C+especially+for+rare+and+weak+effects%2E+Stat%2E+Sci%2E+2015%3B+30%281%29%3A1%2D25%2E)
27. Mosteller, F., Wallace, D. L., Inference in an authorship problem: A comparative study of discrimination methods applied to the authorship of the disputed federalist papers. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1963; 58:275–309. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Mosteller%2C+F%2E%2C+Wallace%2C+D%2E+L%2E%2C+Inference+in+an+authorship+problem%3A+A+comparative+study+of+discrimination+methods+applied+to+the+authorship+of+the+disputed+federalist+papers%2E+J%2E+Am%2E+Stat%2E+Assoc%2E+1963%3B+)
28. Otto, E., Deuteronomium 1 - 11. Teilbd. 1: 1,1 - 4,43 (Freiburg Basel Wien Herder 2012) 2012: deut, 2. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Otto%2C+E%2E%2C+Deuteronomium+1+%2D+11%2E+Teilbd%2E+1%3A+1%2C1+%2D+4%2C43+%28Freiburg+Basel+Wien+Herder+2012%29+2012%3A+deut%2C+2%2E)
29. Preuss, H.D., Deuteronomium. (Wissenschaftl. Buchgesellschaft) 1982; 164. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Preuss%2C+H%2ED%2E%2C+Deuteronomium%2E+%28Wissenschaftl%2E+Buchgesellschaft%29+1982%3B+164%2E)
30. Dietrich, W., Mathys, H. P., R ö mer, T., Smend, R., Die Entstehung des Alten Testaments. (Kohlhammer Verlag) 2014. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Dietrich%2C+W%2E%2C+Mathys%2C+H%2E+P%2E%2C+R+%C3%B6+mer%2C+T%2E%2C+Smend%2C+R%2E%2C+Die+Entstehung+des+Alten+Testaments%2E+%28Kohlhammer+Verlag%29+2014%2E)
31. Brown, I. V., The higher criticism comes to America, 1880—1900. J. Presbyt. Hist. Soc. (1943-220 1961) 1960; 193–212. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Brown%2C+I%2E+V%2E%2C+The+higher+criticism+comes+to+America%2C+1880%E2%80%941900%2E+J%2E+Presbyt%2E+Hist%2E+Soc%2E+%281943%2D220+1961%29+1960%3B+193%E2%80%93212%2E)
32. Nihan, C., From Priestly Torah to Pentateuch: A study in the composition of the Book of Leviticus. (Mohr Siebeck) 2007; 25. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Nihan%2C+C%2E%2C+From+Priestly+Torah+to+Pentateuch%3A+A+study+in+the+composition+of+the+Book+of+Leviticus%2E+%28Mohr+Siebeck%29+2007%3B+25%2E)
33. Schmid, K, The Neo-Documentarian Manifesto: A Critical Reading. Journal of Biblical Literature, 2021; 140 (3):461-479. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Schmid%2C+K%2C+The+Neo%2DDocumentarian+Manifesto%3A+A+Critical+Reading%2E+Journal+of+Biblical+Literature%2C+2021%3B+140+%283%29%3A461%2D479%2E)
34. Faigenbaum-Golovin, S., Shaus, A., Sober, B., Levin, D., Na’aman, N., Sass, B., et al. Algorithmic handwriting analysis of Judah’s military correspondence sheds light on composition of biblical texts. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2016; 113 (17):4664-4669. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Faigenbaum%2DGolovin%2C+S%2E%2C+Shaus%2C+A%2E%2C+Sober%2C+B%2E%2C+Levin%2C+D%2E%2C+Na%E2%80%99aman%2C+N%2E%2C+Sass%2C+B%2E%2C+et+al%2E+Algorithmic+handwriting+analysis+of+Judah%E2%80%99s+military+correspondence+sheds+light+on+composition+of+biblical+texts%2E)
35. Faigenbaum-Golovin, S., Shaus, A., Sober, B., Turkel, E., Piasetzky, E., Finkelstein, I. Algorithmic handwriting analysis of the Samaria inscriptions illuminates bureaucratic apparatus in biblical Israel. Plos One 2020; 15 (1) [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Faigenbaum%2DGolovin%2C+S%2E%2C+Shaus%2C+A%2E%2C+Sober%2C+B%2E%2C+Turkel%2C+E%2E%2C+Piasetzky%2C+E%2E%2C+Finkelstein%2C+I%2E+Algorithmic+handwriting+analysis+of+the+Samaria+inscriptions+illuminates+bureaucratic+apparatus+in+biblical+Isr)
36. Li, J. S., Chen, L. C., Monaco, J. V., Singh, P., & Tappert, C. C., A comparison of classifiers and features for authorship authentication of social networking messages. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 2017; 29(14): 3918. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Li%2C+J%2E+S%2E%2C+Chen%2C+L%2E+C%2E%2C+Monaco%2C+J%2E+V%2E%2C+Singh%2C+P%2E%2C+%26+Tappert%2C+C%2E+C%2E%2C+A+comparison+of+classifiers+and+features+for+authorship+authentication+of+social+networking+messages%2E+Concurrency+and+Computation%3A+P)
37. Oliveira Jr, W., Justino, E., Oliveira, L. S. Comparing compression models for authorship attribution. Forensic science international, 2013; 228 (1-3):100-104. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Oliveira+Jr%2C+W%2E%2C+Justino%2C+E%2E%2C+Oliveira%2C+L%2E+S%2E+Comparing+compression+models+for+authorship+attribution%2E+Forensic+science+international%2C+2013%3B+228+%281%2D3%29%3A100%2D104%2E)
38. Murauer, B., & Specht, G., Developing a benchmark for reducing data bias in authorship attribution. In Proc. of the 2nd Workshop on Eval. and Comparison of NLP Sys. 2021; 179-188. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Murauer%2C+B%2E%2C+%26+Specht%2C+G%2E%2C+Developing+a+benchmark+for+reducing+data+bias+in+authorship+attribution%2E+In+Proc%2E+of+the+2nd+Workshop+on+Eval%2E+and+Comparison+of+NLP+Sys%2E+2021%3B+179%2D188%2E)
39. Salton, G., Automatic information organization and retrieval” McGraw-Hill, New York. 1968. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Salton%2C+G%2E%2C+Automatic+information+organization+and+retrieval%E2%80%9D+McGraw%2DHill%2C+New+York%2E+1968%2E)
40. Spärck Jones, K., A statistical interpretation of term specificity and its application in retrieval, Journal of Documentation, 1972:28:11–21. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Sp%C3%A4rck+Jones%2C+K%2E%2C+A+statistical+interpretation+of+term+specificity+and+its+application+in+retrieval%2C+Journal+of+Documentation%2C+1972%3A28%3A11%E2%80%9321%2E)
41. Open scriptures Hebrew Bible project (2019). Original work of the Open Scriptures Hebrew Bible available at [https://github.com/openscriptures/morphhb](https://github.com/openscriptures/morphhb) (Accessed May 8, 2024). [↗](https://github.com/openscriptures/morphhb)
42. Faigenbaum-Golovin, S., Kipnis, A., Bühler, A., Piasetzky, E., Römer, T., & Finkelstein, I. (2024). Data from: Critical biblical studies via word frequency analysis: Unveiling text authorship. Duke Research Data Repository. https://doi.org/10.7924/r4cr61n46. [↗](https://doi.org/10.7924/r4cr61n46) [our card](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/hbo-2024-faigenbaum-golovin-critical-biblical-studies-word-frequency/)
43. Donoho, D. L., Jin, J., Higher criticism thresholding: optimal feature selection when useful features are rare and weak. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2008; 105:14790–14795. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Donoho%2C+D%2E+L%2E%2C+Jin%2C+J%2E%2C+Higher+criticism+thresholding%3A+optimal+feature+selection+when+useful+features+are+rare+and+weak%2E+Proc%2E+Natl%2E+Acad%2E+Sci%2E+2008%3B+105%3A14790%E2%80%9314795%2E)
44. Bevendorff, J., et al., Overview of PAN 2020: Authorship verification, celebrity profiling, profiling fake news spreaders on Twitter, and style change detection. In Experimental IR Meets Multilinguality, Multimodality, and Interaction: 11th International Conference of the CLEF Association, Proc. 2020; 11:372-383. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Bevendorff%2C+J%2E%2C+et+al%2E%2C+Overview+of+PAN+2020%3A+Authorship+verification%2C+celebrity+profiling%2C+profiling+fake+news+spreaders+on+Twitter%2C+and+style+change+detection%2E+In+Experimental+IR+Meets+Multilinguali)
45. Finkelstein, I., R ö mer, T., The historical and archaeological background behind the old Israel ark narrative. Peeters, 2020. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Finkelstein%2C+I%2E%2C+R+%C3%B6+mer%2C+T%2E%2C+The+historical+and+archaeological+background+behind+the+old+Israel+ark+narrative%2E+Peeters%2C+2020%2E)
46. Japhet, S., I and II Chronicles: a commentary. (Westminster John Knox Press) 1993. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Japhet%2C+S%2E%2C+I+and+II+Chronicles%3A+a+commentary%2E+%28Westminster+John+Knox+Press%29+1993%2E)
47. Abadie, P., Introduction à l’Ancien Testament. (Labor et fides) 2009; 49. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Abadie%2C+P%2E%2C+Introduction+%C3%A0+l%E2%80%99Ancien+Testament%2E+%28Labor+et+fides%29+2009%3B+49%2E)
48. Finkelstein, I., R ö mer, T., Comments on the historical background of the Abraham narrative. between “Realia” and “Exegetica”. Hebr. Bible Anc. Isr. 2014; 3:3–23. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Finkelstein%2C+I%2E%2C+R+%C3%B6+mer%2C+T%2E%2C+Comments+on+the+historical+background+of+the+Abraham+narrative%2E+between+%E2%80%9CRealia%E2%80%9D+and+%E2%80%9CExegetica%E2%80%9D%2E+Hebr%2E+Bible+Anc%2E+Isr%2E+2014%3B+3%3A3%E2%80%9323%2E)
49. Becker, U., Richterzeit und Königtum: Redaktionsgeschichtliche Studien zum Richterbuch. (Walter de Gruyter) 1990; 192. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Becker%2C+U%2E%2C+Richterzeit+und+K%C3%B6nigtum%3A+Redaktionsgeschichtliche+Studien+zum+Richterbuch%2E+%28Walter+de+Gruyter%29+1990%3B+192%2E)
50. Lanoir, C., “Juges”, in P. Abadie, Introduction à l’Ancien Testament. (Labor et fides) 2009; 49. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Lanoir%2C+C%2E%2C+%E2%80%9CJuges%E2%80%9D%2C+in+P%2E+Abadie%2C+Introduction+%C3%A0+l%E2%80%99Ancien+Testament%2E+%28Labor+et+fides%29+2009%3B+49%2E)
51. Knauf, E. A., “L “historiographie Deutéronomiste” existe-t-elle”, in Israël Construit Son Histoire. L’Historiographie Deutéronomiste à La Lumière Des Recherches Récentes, ed. by Albert de Pury, Thomas Römer, and Jean-Daniel Macchi (Genève: Labor et Fides) 1996: 409–418 [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Knauf%2C+E%2E+A%2E%2C+%E2%80%9CL+%E2%80%9Chistoriographie+Deut%C3%A9ronomiste%E2%80%9D+existe%2Dt%2Delle%E2%80%9D%2C+in+Isra%C3%ABl+Construit+Son+Histoire%2E+L%E2%80%99Historiographie+Deut%C3%A9ronomiste+%C3%A0+La+Lumi%C3%A8re+Des+Recherches+R%C3%A9centes%2C+ed%2E+by+Albert+de+Pury%2C+Thomas)
52. Finkelstein, I., R ö mer, T., Comments on the historical background of the Jacob narrative in Genesis. Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 2014; 126:317–338. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Finkelstein%2C+I%2E%2C+R+%C3%B6+mer%2C+T%2E%2C+Comments+on+the+historical+background+of+the+Jacob+narrative+in+Genesis%2E+Zeitschrift+f%C3%BCr+die+alttestamentliche+Wissenschaft+2014%3B+126%3A317%E2%80%93338%2E)
53. Macchi, J. D., Le Livre d’Esther, Commentaire de l’Ancien Testament XIV (Genève: Labor et Fides) (2016). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Macchi%2C+J%2E+D%2E%2C+Le+Livre+d%E2%80%99Esther%2C+Commentaire+de+l%E2%80%99Ancien+Testament+XIV+%28Gen%C3%A8ve%3A+Labor+et+Fides%29+%282016%29%2E)
54. Steymans, H. U., Verheißung und Drohung: Lev 26, in: H.-J. Fabry et H.-W. Jüngling (éd), Levitikus als Buch (BBB 119), Berlin - Bodenheim b. Mainz: Philo, 1999; 263-307. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Steymans%2C+H%2E+U%2E%2C+Verhei%C3%9Fung+und+Drohung%3A+Lev+26%2C+in%3A+H%2E%2DJ%2E+Fabry+et+H%2E%2DW%2E+J%C3%BCngling+%28%C3%A9d%29%2C+Levitikus+als+Buch+%28BBB+119%29%2C+Berlin+%2D+Bodenheim+b%2E+Mainz%3A+Philo%2C+1999%3B+263%2D307%2E)
55. Stackert, J., Rewriting the Torah: literary revision in Deuteronomy and the Holiness Legislation 52 (Forschungen zum Alten Testament,), Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Stackert%2C+J%2E%2C+Rewriting+the+Torah%3A+literary+revision+in+Deuteronomy+and+the+Holiness+Legislation+52+%28Forschungen+zum+Alten+Testament%2C%29%2C+T%C3%BCbingen%3A+Mohr+Siebeck%2C+2007%2E)
56. Nihan, C., Heiligkeitsgesetz und Pentateuch. Traditions- und kompositionsgeschichtliche Aspekte von Levitikus 26, in: F. Hartenstein et K. Schmid (éd), Abschied von der Priesterschrift? Zum Stand der Pentateuchdebatte (Veröffentlichungen der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft für Theologie 40), Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt 2015; 186-218. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Nihan%2C+C%2E%2C+Heiligkeitsgesetz+und+Pentateuch%2E+Traditions%2D+und+kompositionsgeschichtliche+Aspekte+von+Levitikus+26%2C+in%3A+F%2E+Hartenstein+et+K%2E+Schmid+%28%C3%A9d%29%2C+Abschied+von+der+Priesterschrift%3F+Zum+Stand+der+)
57. Rost, L., Die Überlieferung von der Thronnachfolge Davids. (Kohlhammer) 2011; 42. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Rost%2C+L%2E%2C+Die+%C3%9Cberlieferung+von+der+Thronnachfolge+Davids%2E+%28Kohlhammer%29+2011%3B+42%2E)
58. Campbell, A.F., I Samuel. (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing), 2003. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Campbell%2C+A%2EF%2E%2C+I+Samuel%2E+%28Wm%2E+B%2E+Eerdmans+Publishing%29%2C+2003%2E)
59. Bodner, K., Ark-Eology: Shifting Emphases in ‘Ark Narrative’Scholarship. Curr. biblical research, 2006; 4:169– 197. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Bodner%2C+K%2E%2C+Ark%2DEology%3A+Shifting+Emphases+in+%E2%80%98Ark+Narrative%E2%80%99Scholarship%2E+Curr%2E+biblical+research%2C+2006%3B+4%3A169%E2%80%93+197%2E)
60. Porter, M. F., An algorithm for suffix stripping. Program 1980. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Porter%2C+M%2E+F%2E%2C+An+algorithm+for+suffix+stripping%2E+Program+1980%2E)
61. Lovins, J. B., Development of a stemming algorithm. Mech. Transl. Comput. Linguist. 1968; 11:22–31. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Lovins%2C+J%2E+B%2E%2C+Development+of+a+stemming+algorithm%2E+Mech%2E+Transl%2E+Comput%2E+Linguist%2E+1968%3B+11%3A22%E2%80%9331%2E)
62. Jivani, A. G., et al., A comparative study of stemming algorithms. Int. J. Comp. Tech. Appl 2011; 2:1930–1938. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jivani%2C+A%2E+G%2E%2C+et+al%2E%2C+A+comparative+study+of+stemming+algorithms%2E+Int%2E+J%2E+Comp%2E+Tech%2E+Appl+2011%3B+2%3A1930%E2%80%931938%2E)
63. Tsarfaty, R., Seker, A., Sadde, S., Klein, S., What’s wrong with Hebrew NLP? and how to make it right. arXiv 2019. arXiv:1908.05453. (Accessed May 8, 2024). [↗](https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.05453) [our card](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/aclbulk-2019-tsarfaty-what-s-wrong-hebrew-nlp/)
64. Qi, P., Dozat, T., Zhang, Y., Manning, C. D., Universal dependency parsing from scratch. arXiv 2019. arXiv:1901.10457 (Accessed May 8, 2024). [↗](https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.10457)
65. Analytical tools for Hebrew texts. Dicta. Available at [https://dicta.org.il/](https://dicta.org.il/) (Accessed May 8, 2024). [↗](https://dicta.org.il/)