am / README.md
omarkamali's picture
Upload all models and assets for am (20251201)
351da00 verified
metadata
language: am
language_name: AM
language_family: semitic_ethiopic
tags:
  - wikilangs
  - nlp
  - tokenizer
  - embeddings
  - n-gram
  - markov
  - wikipedia
  - monolingual
  - family-semitic_ethiopic
license: mit
library_name: wikilangs
pipeline_tag: feature-extraction
datasets:
  - omarkamali/wikipedia-monthly
dataset_info:
  name: wikipedia-monthly
  description: Monthly snapshots of Wikipedia articles across 300+ languages
metrics:
  - name: best_compression_ratio
    type: compression
    value: 3.278
  - name: best_isotropy
    type: isotropy
    value: 0.907
  - name: vocabulary_size
    type: vocab
    value: 108024
generated: 2025-12-27T00:00:00.000Z

AM - Wikilangs Models

Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study

This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on AM Wikipedia data. We analyze tokenizers, n-gram models, Markov chains, vocabulary statistics, and word embeddings.

๐Ÿ“‹ Repository Contents

Models & Assets

  • Tokenizers (8k, 16k, 32k, 64k)
  • N-gram models (2, 3, 4-gram)
  • Markov chains (context of 1, 2, 3 and 4)
  • Subword N-gram and Markov chains
  • Embeddings in various sizes and dimensions
  • Language Vocabulary
  • Language Statistics Performance Dashboard

Analysis and Evaluation


1. Tokenizer Evaluation

Tokenizer Compression

Results

Vocab Size Compression Avg Token Len UNK Rate Total Tokens
8k 2.456x 2.43 0.1639% 455,103
16k 2.758x 2.73 0.1841% 405,251
32k 3.035x 3.00 0.2026% 368,183
64k 3.278x ๐Ÿ† 3.24 0.2188% 340,895

Tokenization Examples

Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size:

Sample 1: `' แ‹จ แ‰ปแ‹ญแŠ“ แŠ•แŒ‰แˆฅ แАแ‰ แˆญแข

แ‹‹แ‰ข แˆ˜แŒฝแˆแแ‰ต

แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ:แ‹จแ‰ปแ‹ญแŠ“ แАแŒˆแˆฅแ‰ณแ‰ต`

Vocab Tokens Count
8k โ–' โ–แ‹จ โ–แ‰ปแ‹ญแŠ“ โ–แŠ•แŒ‰แˆฅ โ–แАแ‰ แˆญแข โ–แ‹‹แ‰ข โ–แˆ˜แŒฝแˆแแ‰ต โ–แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : แ‹จแ‰ปแ‹ญแŠ“ ... (+1 more) 11
16k โ–' โ–แ‹จ โ–แ‰ปแ‹ญแŠ“ โ–แŠ•แŒ‰แˆฅ โ–แАแ‰ แˆญแข โ–แ‹‹แ‰ข โ–แˆ˜แŒฝแˆแแ‰ต โ–แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : แ‹จแ‰ปแ‹ญแŠ“ ... (+1 more) 11
32k โ–' โ–แ‹จ โ–แ‰ปแ‹ญแŠ“ โ–แŠ•แŒ‰แˆฅ โ–แАแ‰ แˆญแข โ–แ‹‹แ‰ข โ–แˆ˜แŒฝแˆแแ‰ต โ–แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : แ‹จแ‰ปแ‹ญแŠ“ ... (+1 more) 11
64k โ–' โ–แ‹จ โ–แ‰ปแ‹ญแŠ“ โ–แŠ•แŒ‰แˆฅ โ–แАแ‰ แˆญแข โ–แ‹‹แ‰ข โ–แˆ˜แŒฝแˆแแ‰ต โ–แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : แ‹จแ‰ปแ‹ญแŠ“ ... (+1 more) 11

Sample 2: `แŠขแ‰ตแ‹ฎแŒตแ‹ซ แ‹แˆตแŒฅ แ‹จแˆšแˆฐแˆซ แ‹จแˆแŒแ‰ฅ แŠ แ‹ญแАแ‰ต แˆฒแˆ†แŠ•แฃ แ‹จแˆšแˆฐแˆซแ‹แˆ แŠจแˆฑแแˆตแŠ•แ‹ดแŠ“ แŠ แŠ•แ‹ต แŠ แŠ•แ‹ต แŒŠแ‹œแˆ แˆฝแˆแ‰ฅแˆซ แ‰†แˆŽ แАแ‹แข

แŠ แ‹˜แŒˆแŒƒแŒ€แ‰ต แˆŠแ‰ฐ...`

Vocab Tokens Count
8k โ–แŠขแ‰ตแ‹ฎแŒตแ‹ซ โ–แ‹แˆตแŒฅ โ–แ‹จแˆšแˆฐแˆซ โ–แ‹จแˆแŒแ‰ฅ โ–แŠ แ‹ญแАแ‰ต โ–แˆฒแˆ†แŠ•แฃ โ–แ‹จแˆšแˆฐแˆซ แ‹แˆ โ–แŠจแˆฑ แ ... (+20 more) 30
16k โ–แŠขแ‰ตแ‹ฎแŒตแ‹ซ โ–แ‹แˆตแŒฅ โ–แ‹จแˆšแˆฐแˆซ โ–แ‹จแˆแŒแ‰ฅ โ–แŠ แ‹ญแАแ‰ต โ–แˆฒแˆ†แŠ•แฃ โ–แ‹จแˆšแˆฐแˆซแ‹แˆ โ–แŠจแˆฑ แ แˆตแŠ• ... (+16 more) 26
32k โ–แŠขแ‰ตแ‹ฎแŒตแ‹ซ โ–แ‹แˆตแŒฅ โ–แ‹จแˆšแˆฐแˆซ โ–แ‹จแˆแŒแ‰ฅ โ–แŠ แ‹ญแАแ‰ต โ–แˆฒแˆ†แŠ•แฃ โ–แ‹จแˆšแˆฐแˆซแ‹แˆ โ–แŠจแˆฑ แ แˆตแŠ•แ‹ด ... (+14 more) 24
64k โ–แŠขแ‰ตแ‹ฎแŒตแ‹ซ โ–แ‹แˆตแŒฅ โ–แ‹จแˆšแˆฐแˆซ โ–แ‹จแˆแŒแ‰ฅ โ–แŠ แ‹ญแАแ‰ต โ–แˆฒแˆ†แŠ•แฃ โ–แ‹จแˆšแˆฐแˆซแ‹แˆ โ–แŠจแˆฑ แ แˆตแŠ•แ‹ด ... (+14 more) 24

Sample 3: 1 January 1955 - 11 September 1955 แŠฅ.แŠค.แŠฃ. = 1947 แŠ .แˆ. 12 September 1955 - 31 Dec...

Vocab Tokens Count
8k โ– 1 โ–january โ– 1 9 5 5 โ–- โ– ... (+59 more) 69
16k โ– 1 โ–january โ– 1 9 5 5 โ–- โ– ... (+59 more) 69
32k โ– 1 โ–january โ– 1 9 5 5 โ–- โ– ... (+59 more) 69
64k โ– 1 โ–january โ– 1 9 5 5 โ–- โ– ... (+59 more) 69

Key Findings

  • Best Compression: 64k achieves 3.278x compression
  • Lowest UNK Rate: 8k with 0.1639% unknown tokens
  • Trade-off: Larger vocabularies improve compression but increase model size
  • Recommendation: 32k vocabulary provides optimal balance for production use

2. N-gram Model Evaluation

N-gram Perplexity

N-gram Coverage

Results

N-gram Perplexity Entropy Unique N-grams Top-100 Coverage Top-1000 Coverage
2-gram 10,759 ๐Ÿ† 13.39 48,164 21.6% 40.3%
2-gram 2,321 ๐Ÿ† 11.18 26,048 32.4% 67.6%
3-gram 16,194 13.98 68,935 19.7% 36.8%
3-gram 21,529 14.39 173,382 11.5% 34.1%
4-gram 45,509 15.47 148,975 14.6% 27.1%
4-gram 104,202 16.67 623,179 6.7% 19.0%

Top 5 N-grams by Size

2-grams:

Rank N-gram Count
1 แАแ‹ แข 21,098
2 แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : 19,279
3 แก แก 9,600
4 แАแ‰ แˆญ แข 6,290
5 แ‹“ . 6,166

3-grams:

Rank N-gram Count
1 แˆแˆณแˆŒ แАแ‹ แข 5,880
2 แ‹จแŠ แˆ›แˆญแŠ› แˆแˆณแˆŒ แАแ‹ 5,832
3 แ‹“ . แˆ 5,831
4 แข แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : 5,106
5 . แˆ . 4,919

4-grams:

Rank N-gram Count
1 แ‹จแŠ แˆ›แˆญแŠ› แˆแˆณแˆŒ แАแ‹ แข 5,832
2 แ‹“ . แˆ . 4,753
3 แŠฅ . แŠค . 4,046
4 . แŠค . แŠ  3,983
5 แˆแˆณแˆŒ แАแ‹ แข แ‰ตแˆญแŒ‰แˆ™ 3,720

Key Findings

  • Best Perplexity: 2-gram with 2,321
  • Entropy Trend: Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable)
  • Coverage: Top-1000 patterns cover ~19% of corpus
  • Recommendation: 4-gram or 5-gram for best predictive performance

3. Markov Chain Evaluation

Markov Entropy

Markov Branching

Results

Context Avg Entropy Perplexity Branching Factor Unique Contexts Predictability
1 0.6978 1.622 4.88 254,884 30.2%
1 1.4402 2.714 22.49 2,349 0.0%
2 0.1891 1.140 1.44 1,243,645 81.1%
2 1.1315 2.191 7.49 52,808 0.0%
3 0.0627 1.044 1.12 1,794,848 93.7%
3 0.6676 1.588 3.40 395,365 33.2%
4 0.0256 ๐Ÿ† 1.018 1.04 2,006,381 97.4%
4 0.4515 ๐Ÿ† 1.367 2.11 1,342,049 54.9%

Generated Text Samples

Below are text samples generated from each Markov chain model:

Context Size 1:

  1. แข แ‰ตแˆแˆ…แˆญแ‰ต แ‰คแ‰ต แАแŒฃแŒฅแˆŽ แˆ˜แŒˆแŠ•แ‹˜แ‰ฅ แ‹ญแŠ–แˆญแ‰ แ‰ณแˆ แ‰ฐแ‰ฅแˆŽ แ‹จแˆšแ‰ณแˆ˜แАแ‹ แ‹จแ‰ถแˆชแŠ– แ‰€แŠ–แŠ“ แˆ›แˆตแ‰ฐแˆ›แˆญแŠ“ แ‰ตแˆแˆ…แˆญแ‰ต แˆฝแŒแŒแˆญ แˆ˜แŠ•แŒแˆตแ‰ต 1643 -
  2. แก แˆ›แˆตแˆจแŒƒ แŠฅแŠ•แ‹ฐแˆŒแˆˆ แ‹ญแ‰†แŒ แˆซแˆ แ‹จแŠ แˆ›แˆญแŠ› แˆแˆณแˆŒ แАแ‹ แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : / wiki / div id ) 2002
  3. . ) แŠฅแŠ“ แ‹จแ‰ แˆˆแŒ  แŠฅแ‹แАแ‰ต แˆ†แŠ– แˆˆแ“แ‹แˆœแˆซแˆต แŠญแˆˆแ‰ฅ แ‰ แˆแˆจแˆญ แฃ 1943 ) แ‹จแŠ แˆนแˆญ แŠ•แŒ‰แˆฅ แ‰ณแˆ‹แ‰ แ’แ‰ฐแˆญ

Context Size 2:

  1. แАแ‹ แข แ‰ตแˆญแŒ‰แˆ™ แˆ˜แˆแˆต แˆฒแ‰ณแŒฃ แฃ แ‹แˆแ‰ณ แ‰ฐแˆแŒฅแˆฎแ‹ แ‹จแˆ†แА แŒแˆฉแˆ แ‹ตแˆแŒปแ‹Š แАแ‹ แข แ‰ 13แŠ›แ‹ แŠญแแˆˆ แ‹˜แˆ˜แŠ• แ‹จแ‹ชแŒ‚แŠ•แŒ
  2. แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : แ‹จแŠฎแˆชแ‹ซ แАแŒˆแˆฅแ‰ณแ‰ต
  3. แก แก แ‰ แŠ แŠซแˆ‹แ‹Š แŒˆแŒฝแ‰ณ แŠฅแŠ“ แŠจแˆ…แ‹แ‰ก แŠ แŠ•แ‹ต แŠ แˆซแ‰ฐแŠ›แ‹แŠ• แ‹ญแˆธแแŠ“แˆ แข แˆแŠ•แˆ แŠฅแŠ•แŠณแŠ• แ‰ฐแˆ˜แˆณแˆณแ‹ญ แŒฅแˆแˆจแ‰ต แŠจแ‰ฅแ‹™ แŠ แˆฅแˆญแ‰ฐ แ‹“แˆ˜แ‰ณแ‰ต

Context Size 3:

  1. แˆแˆณแˆŒ แАแ‹ แข แ‹˜แˆ˜แА แŒแˆญแˆแ‰ขแŒฅ แ‹แˆป แ‹ˆแ‹ฐ แˆฐแˆญแ‹ถ แŠ แˆ…แ‹ซ แ‹ˆแ‹ฐ แˆŠแŒฅ แ‹˜แˆ˜แŠ• แŠฅแŠ•แ‹ฐแŠ•แŒ‰แˆฑ แŠ แ‹แ‹ตแˆ› แŠฅแŠ•แ‹ฐแŠ•แ‹แˆฑ แ‹จแŠ แˆ›แˆญแŠ› แˆแˆณแˆŒ แАแ‹
  2. แ‹จแŠ แˆ›แˆญแŠ› แˆแˆณแˆŒ แАแ‹ แข แ‰ตแˆญแŒ‰แˆ™ แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : แ‹ซแˆแ‰ฐแ‰ฐแˆจแŒŽแˆ˜ แˆแˆณแˆŒ แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : แ‰ฐแˆจแ‰ตแŠ“ แˆแˆณแˆŒ แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : แ‰ฐแˆจแ‰ตแŠ“ แˆแˆณแˆŒ แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ
  3. แ‹“ . แˆ . แ‰ แŠ‹แˆ‹ แˆˆแˆ†แŠ‘แ‰ต แ‹“แˆ˜แ‰ณแ‰ต แŒแŠ• แ‰ แˆŒแˆ‹ แ‰€แŠ• แˆ‹แ‹ญ แˆ˜แˆ†แŠ‘แŠ• แ‹ญแŒˆแŠ•แ‹˜แ‰ก แข แˆˆแŠฅแАแ‹šแ‹ซ แ‹“แˆ˜แ‰ถแ‰ฝ แ‹ญแˆ… แ‹จแ‰€แŠ•

Context Size 4:

  1. แ‹จแŠ แˆ›แˆญแŠ› แˆแˆณแˆŒ แАแ‹ แข แ‰ตแˆญแŒ‰แˆ™ แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : แ‹ซแˆแ‰ฐแ‰ฐแˆจแŒŽแˆ˜ แˆแˆณแˆŒ แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : แ‰ฐแˆจแ‰ตแŠ“ แˆแˆณแˆŒ แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : แ‰ฐแˆจแ‰ตแŠ“ แˆแˆณแˆŒ แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ :
  2. แ‹“ . แˆ . แŠ แˆตแ‰€แ‹ตแˆž แ‹ˆแ‹ญแˆ แŠจ2091 แ‹“ . แˆ . แ‰ฐแŠญแˆˆแŒปแ‹ตแ‰… แˆ˜แŠฉแˆชแ‹ซ แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ : แ‰ฐแŠญแˆˆแŒปแ‹ตแ‰… แˆ˜แŠฉแˆญแ‹ซ แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ :
  3. แŠฅ . แŠค . แŠ  . แ‰  1914 แ‹จแˆฉแˆฒแ‹ซ แŠ•แŒ‰แˆ  แАแŒˆแˆฅแ‰ต แŠ’แŠฎแˆ‹แˆต ii ( 1894 - 1917 ) แŠฅ

Key Findings

  • Best Predictability: Context-4 with 97.4% predictability
  • Branching Factor: Decreases with context size (more deterministic)
  • Memory Trade-off: Larger contexts require more storage (1,342,049 contexts)
  • Recommendation: Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation

4. Vocabulary Analysis

Zipf's Law

Top Words

Coverage Curve

Statistics

Metric Value
Vocabulary Size 108,024
Total Tokens 1,810,273
Mean Frequency 16.76
Median Frequency 3
Frequency Std Dev 184.67

Most Common Words

Rank Word Frequency
1 แАแ‹ 28,114
2 แŠฅแŠ“ 23,158
3 แˆ˜แ‹ฐแ‰ฅ 19,525
4 แˆ‹แ‹ญ 13,580
5 แˆแˆณแˆŒ 12,239
6 แ‹แˆตแŒฅ 9,959
7 แАแ‰ แˆญ 9,632
8 แ‹ˆแ‹ฐ 9,166
9 แˆ 8,691
10 แ‹“ 8,629

Least Common Words (from vocabulary)

Rank Word Frequency
1 แŒ‚แŠ’แŠซ 2
2 แ‹ฒแŠ’แŠซแˆ‹ 2
3 แ‹ˆแˆตแ‹ฐแˆฝ 2
4 แŠ แŠ•แŠณแŠณ 2
5 แˆ˜แ‹ณแˆแ‹ˆ 2
6 แˆจแ‹ตแŠฅ 2
7 แŠ แŠ•แ‹ฐแŠ›แ‹ญแ‰ฑ 2
8 แ‹ˆแ‹ฐแˆฐแˆแ 2
9 แ‹จแŠ’แŠฎแ–แˆŠแˆต 2
10 แŒ‚แˆแŠ“แ‹šแ‹จแˆ 2

Zipf's Law Analysis

Metric Value
Zipf Coefficient 0.9297
Rยฒ (Goodness of Fit) 0.994674
Adherence Quality excellent

Coverage Analysis

Top N Words Coverage
Top 100 22.3%
Top 1,000 44.9%
Top 5,000 65.4%
Top 10,000 74.1%

Key Findings

  • Zipf Compliance: Rยฒ=0.9947 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law
  • High Frequency Dominance: Top 100 words cover 22.3% of corpus
  • Long Tail: 98,024 words needed for remaining 25.9% coverage

5. Word Embeddings Evaluation

Embedding Isotropy

Similarity Matrix

t-SNE Words

t-SNE Sentences

Model Comparison

Model Vocab Size Dimension Avg Norm Std Norm Isotropy
mono_32d 40,456 32 3.565 0.969 0.8976
mono_64d 40,456 64 4.280 0.895 0.9070 ๐Ÿ†
mono_128d 40,456 128 5.026 0.790 0.8490
embeddings_enhanced 0 0 0.000 0.000 0.0000

Key Findings

  • Best Isotropy: mono_64d with 0.9070 (more uniform distribution)
  • Dimension Trade-off: Higher dimensions capture more semantics but reduce isotropy
  • Vocabulary Coverage: All models cover 40,456 words
  • Recommendation: 100d for balanced semantic capture and efficiency

6. Summary & Recommendations

Performance Dashboard

Production Recommendations

Component Recommended Rationale
Tokenizer 32k BPE Best compression (3.28x) with low UNK rate
N-gram 5-gram Lowest perplexity (2,321)
Markov Context-4 Highest predictability (97.4%)
Embeddings 100d Balanced semantic capture and isotropy

Appendix: Metrics Glossary & Interpretation Guide

This section provides definitions, intuitions, and guidance for interpreting the metrics used throughout this report.

Tokenizer Metrics

Compression Ratio

Definition: The ratio of characters to tokens (chars/token). Measures how efficiently the tokenizer represents text.

Intuition: Higher compression means fewer tokens needed to represent the same text, reducing sequence lengths for downstream models. A 3x compression means ~3 characters per token on average.

What to seek: Higher is generally better for efficiency, but extremely high compression may indicate overly aggressive merging that loses morphological information.

Average Token Length (Fertility)

Definition: Mean number of characters per token produced by the tokenizer.

Intuition: Reflects the granularity of tokenization. Longer tokens capture more context but may struggle with rare words; shorter tokens are more flexible but increase sequence length.

What to seek: Balance between 2-5 characters for most languages. Arabic/morphologically-rich languages may benefit from slightly longer tokens.

Unknown Token Rate (OOV Rate)

Definition: Percentage of tokens that map to the unknown/UNK token, indicating words the tokenizer cannot represent.

Intuition: Lower OOV means better vocabulary coverage. High OOV indicates the tokenizer encounters many unseen character sequences.

What to seek: Below 1% is excellent; below 5% is acceptable. BPE tokenizers typically achieve very low OOV due to subword fallback.

N-gram Model Metrics

Perplexity

Definition: Measures how "surprised" the model is by test data. Mathematically: 2^(cross-entropy). Lower values indicate better prediction.

Intuition: If perplexity is 100, the model is as uncertain as if choosing uniformly among 100 options at each step. A perplexity of 10 means effectively choosing among 10 equally likely options.

What to seek: Lower is better. Perplexity decreases with larger n-grams (more context). Values vary widely by language and corpus size.

Entropy

Definition: Average information content (in bits) needed to encode the next token given the context. Related to perplexity: perplexity = 2^entropy.

Intuition: High entropy means high uncertainty/randomness; low entropy means predictable patterns. Natural language typically has entropy between 1-4 bits per character.

What to seek: Lower entropy indicates more predictable text patterns. Entropy should decrease as n-gram size increases.

Coverage (Top-K)

Definition: Percentage of corpus occurrences explained by the top K most frequent n-grams.

Intuition: High coverage with few patterns indicates repetitive/formulaic text; low coverage suggests diverse vocabulary usage.

What to seek: Depends on use case. For language modeling, moderate coverage (40-60% with top-1000) is typical for natural text.

Markov Chain Metrics

Average Entropy

Definition: Mean entropy across all contexts, measuring average uncertainty in next-word prediction.

Intuition: Lower entropy means the model is more confident about what comes next. Context-1 has high entropy (many possible next words); Context-4 has low entropy (few likely continuations).

What to seek: Decreasing entropy with larger context sizes. Very low entropy (<0.1) indicates highly deterministic transitions.

Branching Factor

Definition: Average number of unique next tokens observed for each context.

Intuition: High branching = many possible continuations (flexible but uncertain); low branching = few options (predictable but potentially repetitive).

What to seek: Branching factor should decrease with context size. Values near 1.0 indicate nearly deterministic chains.

Predictability

Definition: Derived metric: (1 - normalized_entropy) ร— 100%. Indicates how deterministic the model's predictions are.

Intuition: 100% predictability means the next word is always certain; 0% means completely random. Real text falls between these extremes.

What to seek: Higher predictability for text generation quality, but too high (>98%) may produce repetitive output.

Vocabulary & Zipf's Law Metrics

Zipf's Coefficient

Definition: The slope of the log-log plot of word frequency vs. rank. Zipf's law predicts this should be approximately -1.

Intuition: A coefficient near -1 indicates the corpus follows natural language patterns where a few words are very common and most words are rare.

What to seek: Values between -0.8 and -1.2 indicate healthy natural language distribution. Deviations may suggest domain-specific or artificial text.

Rยฒ (Coefficient of Determination)

Definition: Measures how well the linear fit explains the frequency-rank relationship. Ranges from 0 to 1.

Intuition: Rยฒ near 1.0 means the data closely follows Zipf's law; lower values indicate deviation from expected word frequency patterns.

What to seek: Rยฒ > 0.95 is excellent; > 0.99 indicates near-perfect Zipf adherence typical of large natural corpora.

Vocabulary Coverage

Definition: Cumulative percentage of corpus tokens accounted for by the top N words.

Intuition: Shows how concentrated word usage is. If top-100 words cover 50% of text, the corpus relies heavily on common words.

What to seek: Top-100 covering 30-50% is typical. Higher coverage indicates more repetitive text; lower suggests richer vocabulary.

Word Embedding Metrics

Isotropy

Definition: Measures how uniformly distributed vectors are in the embedding space. Computed as the ratio of minimum to maximum singular values.

Intuition: High isotropy (near 1.0) means vectors spread evenly in all directions; low isotropy means vectors cluster in certain directions, reducing expressiveness.

What to seek: Higher isotropy generally indicates better-quality embeddings. Values > 0.1 are reasonable; > 0.3 is good. Lower-dimensional embeddings tend to have higher isotropy.

Average Norm

Definition: Mean magnitude (L2 norm) of word vectors in the embedding space.

Intuition: Indicates the typical "length" of vectors. Consistent norms suggest stable training; high variance may indicate some words are undertrained.

What to seek: Relatively consistent norms across models. The absolute value matters less than consistency (low std deviation).

Cosine Similarity

Definition: Measures angular similarity between vectors, ranging from -1 (opposite) to 1 (identical direction).

Intuition: Words with similar meanings should have high cosine similarity. This is the standard metric for semantic relatedness in embeddings.

What to seek: Semantically related words should score > 0.5; unrelated words should be near 0. Synonyms often score > 0.7.

t-SNE Visualization

Definition: t-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding - a dimensionality reduction technique that preserves local structure for visualization.

Intuition: Clusters in t-SNE plots indicate groups of semantically related words. Spread indicates vocabulary diversity; tight clusters suggest semantic coherence.

What to seek: Meaningful clusters (e.g., numbers together, verbs together). Avoid over-interpreting distances - t-SNE preserves local, not global, structure.

General Interpretation Guidelines

  1. Compare within model families: Metrics are most meaningful when comparing models of the same type (e.g., 8k vs 64k tokenizer).
  2. Consider trade-offs: Better performance on one metric often comes at the cost of another (e.g., compression vs. OOV rate).
  3. Context matters: Optimal values depend on downstream tasks. Text generation may prioritize different metrics than classification.
  4. Corpus influence: All metrics are influenced by corpus characteristics. Wikipedia text differs from social media or literature.
  5. Language-specific patterns: Morphologically rich languages (like Arabic) may show different optimal ranges than analytic languages.

Visualizations Index

Visualization Description
Tokenizer Compression Compression ratios by vocabulary size
Tokenizer Fertility Average token length by vocabulary
Tokenizer OOV Unknown token rates
Tokenizer Total Tokens Total tokens by vocabulary
N-gram Perplexity Perplexity by n-gram size
N-gram Entropy Entropy by n-gram size
N-gram Coverage Top pattern coverage
N-gram Unique Unique n-gram counts
Markov Entropy Entropy by context size
Markov Branching Branching factor by context
Markov Contexts Unique context counts
Zipf's Law Frequency-rank distribution with fit
Vocab Frequency Word frequency distribution
Top 20 Words Most frequent words
Vocab Coverage Cumulative coverage curve
Embedding Isotropy Vector space uniformity
Embedding Norms Vector magnitude distribution
Embedding Similarity Word similarity heatmap
Nearest Neighbors Similar words for key terms
t-SNE Words 2D word embedding visualization
t-SNE Sentences 2D sentence embedding visualization
Position Encoding Encoding method comparison
Model Sizes Storage requirements
Performance Dashboard Comprehensive performance overview

About This Project

Data Source

Models trained on wikipedia-monthly - a monthly snapshot of Wikipedia articles across 300+ languages.

Project

A project by Wikilangs - Open-source NLP models for every Wikipedia language.

Maintainer

Omar Kamali - Omneity Labs

Citation

If you use these models in your research, please cite:

@misc{wikilangs2025,
  author = {Kamali, Omar},
  title = {Wikilangs: Open NLP Models for Wikipedia Languages},
  year = {2025},
  publisher = {HuggingFace},
  url = {https://huggingface.co/wikilangs}
  institution = {Omneity Labs}
}

License

MIT License - Free for academic and commercial use.

Links


Generated by Wikilangs Models Pipeline

Report Date: 2025-12-27 05:42:07