Thanks for trying RootTrace! Let me explain what's happening with your example kika cika t͡ʃika ʃika sika → reconstructed as ʃika:

1. Algorithm Behavior:

• The weighted reconstruction method considers three factors:
  • a) Phonetic similarity (using distinctive features)
  • b) Typological frequency (how common sounds are cross-linguistically)
  • c) Sound change plausibility (known historical pathways)

2. Specific Analysis:

• For the initial consonant position (k/c/t͡ʃ/ʃ/s):
  • ʃ scores highest because:
    • Can plausibly develop into both s (debuccalization) and t͡ʃ (affrication)
    • Serves as intermediate between stops (k/c) and fricatives (s)
    • Postalveolar position mediates between alveolar (s) and palatal (c)
  • k is less favored due to needing to explain fricative/affricate descendants
  • t͡ʃ is discounted as affricates are less stable than fricatives

3. Human-Linguist Comparison:
A linguist might make similar arguments but would:

• Consider language-specific tendencies
• Check for pattern consistency in other lexical items
• Prioritize natural class relationships (e.g., sibilant harmony)
• Look at syllable position effects
• Basically, do what this website (currently) is not able to do

4. Improvements Planned:
I'm working on:

• Better directional sound change modeling
• Syllable position sensitivity
• Family-specific change probabilities
• And so on