(as is the extension, so is the force) published in 1678 [@Moyer1977].*

Introduction
============

Are there situations where [claude shannon]{} is no different than [a sound channel]{}; where [maximum entropy]{} might be considered a reasonable reconstruction for [momentary mixup]{}?[^4] If one is interested in communicating a textual source, an anagram is not a sufficient representation. If however, one is simply interested in classifying the language, an anagram may be sufficient because it gives the same first-order language approximation.[^5] That is to say, the values of the letters (a multiset) may be important when the order of the letters (a permutation) is not. The order of source letters is irrelevant in a multitude of scenarios beyond such language representation and related texture representation applications [@EfrosL1999]. Examples include warehouse inventories [@Lempel1986]; records in scientific or financial databases [@BuchsbaumFG2003]; collections of multimedia files; arrival processes [@Rubin1974]; visual languages that have multiset grammars [@MarriottM1998]; data in a parallel computing paradigm [@BanatreM1993]; and the channel state in chemical channels [@PermuterCVW2006]. Moreover, it has been suggested that when humans use data for recognition or recall tasks [@JuddS1959], or for judgments of coincidences [@GriffithsT2001; @GriffithsT2007], the order of symbols is not relevant.

If a sample consists of 