This paper examines the frequencies of the rhythmic forms of the iambic tetrameter in the oeuvre of various Russian poets of the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. The assumption is that this parameter describes the perceptible peculiarities of rhythm better than the so called stress profile. Entropy is proposed as a measure of rhythmic diversity. Variations of the quantitative value of rhythmic entropy in the works of different poets (or the same poet in different periods of his/her poetic career) are due to the changes in the preference for particular rhythmic forms. It is demonstrated that in the majority of poets the entropy in their early poems is much lower than in their mature period. In order to assess the difference between poetic rhythm and natural language rhythm, the Kullback–Leibler divergence is calculated. It is the divergence of the distribution of rhythmic forms in a particular poem or group of poems from the modelled (language-based or speech-based) distribution of the same forms. It is revealed that in some poets of the 1920s, the poetic rhythm is very close to the “natural” distribution of the rhythmic forms of the iambic tetrameter. It is also shown that the rhythm of stanzaic and text endings differs from the rhythm of a stanza or the entire poem (the endings have a different level of entropy and a different divergence from natural speech).

中文翻译：

---

节奏熵作为节奏多样性的量度（以俄罗斯Iambic四分仪为例）

本文考察了18、19和20世纪俄国各种诗人作品中韵律四边形节奏形式的频率。假设该参数比所谓的压力曲线更好地描述了节奏的可感知特性。提出了熵来衡量节奏多样性。不同诗人（或同一诗人在其诗歌生涯的不同时期）作品中的节奏熵的定量值的变化是由于对特定节奏形式的偏爱的变化所致。事实证明，在大多数诗人中，其早期诗歌的熵远低于其成熟期。为了评估诗歌节奏与自然语言节奏之间的差异，计算了库尔贝克-莱布利尔散度。它是特定诗歌或一组诗歌中节奏形式的分布与相同形式的模型化（基于语言或基于语音的）分布的差异。据揭示，在1920年代的某些诗人中，诗歌的节奏非常接近依比克四度仪的节奏形式的“自然”分布。还表明，节和文本结尾的节奏与节或整首诗的节奏不同（结尾的熵水平不同，与自然语言的发散度也不同）。