Comparing nearly identical treaty texts: a note on the Treaty of Fort Laramie with Sioux, etc., 1851 and Levenshtein's edit distance metric

Vladimir Levenshtein’s edit distance algorithm is used to reveal disparities between delimiter stripped texts of the Senate amended Treaty of Fort Laramie with Sioux, etc., 1851 as corrected in a previous study, and of other federal copies of this transaction. All of the latter deviated markedly from that newly created version, reflecting errors of exclusion, of the absence in some transcripts of the Senate modification, of editorial decisions made by Charles J. Kappler during the preparation of his treaty compilations at the beginning of the twentieth century, and of spelling. These results confirmed that the instrument was until now never published in its complete formal state. This study may serve as a model for future text analyses that might benefit from the employment of Levenshtein’s metric.

[1]  Shane S. Sturrock,et al.  Time Warps, String Edits, and Macromolecules – The Theory and Practice of Sequence Comparison . David Sankoff and Joseph Kruskal. ISBN 1-57586-217-4. Price £13.95 (US$22·95). , 2000 .

[2]  Giovanni Seni,et al.  Generalizing edit distance to incorporate domain information: Handwritten text recognition as a case study , 1996, Pattern Recognit..

[3]  Charles D. Bernholz,et al.  Standardized American Indians: The "Names of Indian tribes and bands" list from the Office of Indian Affairs , 2010, Gov. Inf. Q..

[4]  Michael S. Waterman,et al.  General methods of sequence comparison , 1984 .

[5]  E. J. Fabyan American Indian Treaties: The History of a Political Anomaly , 1995 .

[6]  I. Scott MacKenzie,et al.  Measuring errors in text entry tasks: an application of the Levenshtein string distance statistic , 2001, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[7]  J. Borges Labyrinths: Selected Stories and Other Writings , 1962 .

[8]  Tuomas Heikkilä,et al.  Evaluating methods for computer-assisted stemmatology using artificial benchmark data sets , 2009, Lit. Linguistic Comput..

[9]  Vladimir I. Levenshtein,et al.  Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals , 1965 .

[10]  Tandy J. Warnow,et al.  Analyzing the Order of Items in Manuscripts of The Canterbury Tales , 2003, Computers and the Humanities.

[11]  M. V. Mulken,et al.  Studies in Stemmatology , 1996 .

[12]  Karen Kukich,et al.  Techniques for automatically correcting words in text , 1992, CSUR.

[13]  Massimo Moneglia,et al.  Plagiarism Detection through Multilevel Text Comparison , 2006, 2006 Second International Conference on Automated Production of Cross Media Content for Multi-Channel Distribution (AXMEDIS'06).

[14]  A. Aust Modern treaty law and practice , 2000 .

[15]  Matthew Spencer,et al.  Article: Collating Texts Using Progressive Multiple Alignment , 2004, Comput. Humanit..

[16]  Penny Gilbert Automatic collation: A technique for medieval texts , 1973 .

[17]  Matthew Spencer,et al.  Estimating Distances between Manuscripts Based on Copying Errors , 2001, Lit. Linguistic Comput..

[18]  DIRECTIVBS TRANSMITTAL,et al.  Indian Affairs , 1970, Social Service Review.

[19]  J. Kruskal An Overview of Sequence Comparison: Time Warps, String Edits, and Macromolecules , 1983 .

[20]  SENATE , 1971 .