There's no improbability to their find and there is no real logic to painting even though it's been tried to a degree by Duchamp and others. Even a compositional error, no matter how gross, is not "illogical." It's just bad painting. If there was any logic to art, the abstract expressionists were trying to pull as far away from it as possible. It's no a Where's Waldo game being played, it's a conjecture that every artist signs their painting but why not just use their name as a basis for the composition? If you look at it closely, there is a asymmetry to the proportion of the letters. This could be discerned as a design process which is what every painting teacher I've ever studied under has instructed me not to do. It does loose the intuitive basis of the talent for painting. So even though it may read a bit like artspeak, that's an objective opinion as well. Real artspeak, heard mostly in openings at Soho and usually by some wealthy client, is almost certainly a kind of psycho-babble.
Dali was completely off his rocker in the later years, Reinhardt I'm not so sure about him. If any painter was really trying to approach logic in painting, it was Ad. However, like his Stations of the Cross series, you'd have to still read logic into the image -- it doesn't communicate logic.