AV - Wikilangs Models
Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study
This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on AV Wikipedia data. We analyze tokenizers, n-gram models, Markov chains, vocabulary statistics, and word embeddings.
π 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

Analysis and Evaluation
- 1. Tokenizer Evaluation
- 2. N-gram Model Evaluation
- 3. Markov Chain Evaluation
- 4. Vocabulary Analysis
- 5. Word Embeddings Evaluation
- 6. Summary & Recommendations
- Metrics Glossary
- Visualizations Index
1. Tokenizer Evaluation
Results
| Vocab Size | Compression | Avg Token Len | UNK Rate | Total Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8k | 3.534x | 3.49 | 0.0801% | 219,599 |
| 16k | 3.897x | 3.84 | 0.0884% | 199,103 |
| 32k | 4.254x | 4.20 | 0.0965% | 182,410 |
| 64k | 4.583x π | 4.52 | 0.1039% | 169,325 |
Tokenization Examples
Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size:
Sample 1: `ΠΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡΡΠΊΡ (Π»Π°ΡΠΈΠ½Π°Π·ΡΠ» ΠΌΠ°ΡΣΠ°Π»Π΄Π° ventriculus) β Π³ΣΠ°Π΄Π°ΠΌΠ°ΡΡΠ» Π»Π°Π³Π°-ΡΠ΅ΡΡ .
ΠΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ:Π...`
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | βΠΊΠ²Π°Π½ ΠΈΡ ΡΠΊΡ β( Π»Π°ΡΠΈΠ½Π°Π·ΡΠ» βΠΌΠ°ΡΣΠ°Π»Π΄Π° βv ent ric ul ... (+14 more) |
24 |
| 16k | βΠΊΠ²Π°Π½ ΠΈΡ ΡΠΊΡ β( Π»Π°ΡΠΈΠ½Π°Π·ΡΠ» βΠΌΠ°ΡΣΠ°Π»Π΄Π° βv ent ric ulus ... (+13 more) |
23 |
| 32k | βΠΊΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡΡΠΊΡ β( Π»Π°ΡΠΈΠ½Π°Π·ΡΠ» βΠΌΠ°ΡΣΠ°Π»Π΄Π° βv ent ric ulus ) ββ ... (+11 more) |
21 |
| 64k | βΠΊΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡΡΠΊΡ β( Π»Π°ΡΠΈΠ½Π°Π·ΡΠ» βΠΌΠ°ΡΣΠ°Π»Π΄Π° βvent ric ulus ) ββ βΠ³ΣΠ°Π΄Π°ΠΌΠ°ΡΡΠ» ... (+10 more) |
20 |
Sample 2: ΠΡΠ΄Π΅ΡΠΌΠ΅Ρ ( ) β Π ΠΎΡΡΠΈΡΠ»ΡΡΠ» ΠΡΡΡΠΈΡΠ»Ρ ΠΆΡΠΌΡ
ΣΡΡΠΈΡΡΠ°Π»Π΄Π° Π±ΡΠ³Π΅Π± ΡΠ°Π³ΡΠ°Ρ. Π‘ΡΠ½ΠΆ-Ρ
ΡΠ°Π»Π°ΡΠ»Π΄Π°ΡΠ°...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | βΠ³ ΡΠ΄ Π΅Ρ ΠΌΠ΅Ρ β( β) ββ βΡΠΎΡΡΠΈΡΠ»ΡΡΠ» βΠ±ΡΡΡ ΠΈΡΠ»Ρ ... (+36 more) |
46 |
| 16k | βΠ³ΡΠ΄ Π΅Ρ ΠΌΠ΅Ρ β( β) ββ βΡΠΎΡΡΠΈΡΠ»ΡΡΠ» βΠ±ΡΡΡ ΠΈΡΠ»Ρ βΠΆΡΠΌ ... (+33 more) |
43 |
| 32k | βΠ³ΡΠ΄Π΅ΡΠΌΠ΅Ρ β( β) ββ βΡΠΎΡΡΠΈΡΠ»ΡΡΠ» βΠ±ΡΡΡΠΈΡΠ»Ρ βΠΆΡΠΌΡ
Σ ΡΡΠΈΡΡ Π°Π»Π΄Π° βΠ±ΡΠ³Π΅Π± ... (+25 more) |
35 |
| 64k | βΠ³ΡΠ΄Π΅ΡΠΌΠ΅Ρ β( β) ββ βΡΠΎΡΡΠΈΡΠ»ΡΡΠ» βΠ±ΡΡΡΠΈΡΠ»Ρ βΠΆΡΠΌΡ
ΣΡΡΠΈΡΡ Π°Π»Π΄Π° βΠ±ΡΠ³Π΅Π± βΡΠ°Π³ΡΠ°Ρ ... (+22 more) |
32 |
Sample 3: `ΠΡΡΠ³ΡΠ°-Π±Π°Ρ ΡΠΈΠ½Π°Π»
ΠΡΠ°ΡΡΠ½Π°
Π₯Π²Π°Π½Π°
ΠΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ:1927`
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | βΠ»ΡΡΠ³ΡΠ° - Π±Π°Ρ
ΡΠΈΠ½Π°Π» βΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΡΠ½Π° βΡ
Π²Π°Π½Π° βΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : 1 9 2 ... (+1 more) |
11 |
| 16k | βΠ»ΡΡΠ³ΡΠ° - Π±Π°Ρ
ΡΠΈΠ½Π°Π» βΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΡΠ½Π° βΡ
Π²Π°Π½Π° βΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : 1 9 2 ... (+1 more) |
11 |
| 32k | βΠ»ΡΡΠ³ΡΠ° - Π±Π°Ρ
ΡΠΈΠ½Π°Π» βΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΡΠ½Π° βΡ
Π²Π°Π½Π° βΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : 1 9 2 ... (+1 more) |
11 |
| 64k | βΠ»ΡΡΠ³ΡΠ° - Π±Π°Ρ
ΡΠΈΠ½Π°Π» βΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΡΠ½Π° βΡ
Π²Π°Π½Π° βΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : 1 9 2 ... (+1 more) |
11 |
Key Findings
- Best Compression: 64k achieves 4.583x compression
- Lowest UNK Rate: 8k with 0.0801% 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
Results
| N-gram | Perplexity | Entropy | Unique N-grams | Top-100 Coverage | Top-1000 Coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2-gram | 5,221 π | 12.35 | 14,725 | 20.8% | 49.4% |
| 2-gram | 502 π | 8.97 | 5,314 | 55.0% | 94.9% |
| 3-gram | 8,074 | 12.98 | 19,718 | 16.9% | 42.5% |
| 3-gram | 4,078 | 11.99 | 36,896 | 22.5% | 60.1% |
| 4-gram | 18,096 | 14.14 | 39,973 | 12.6% | 31.2% |
| 4-gram | 18,482 | 14.17 | 151,649 | 12.4% | 35.7% |
Top 5 N-grams by Size
2-grams:
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : |
6,060 |
| 2 | ) . |
2,431 |
| 3 | ) , |
2,098 |
| 4 | ) β |
1,555 |
| 5 | . β |
1,376 |
3-grams:
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | . Π³Π΅ΠΎΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡ ΡΠΎΡΡ |
645 |
| 2 | Π³Π΅ΠΎΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡ ΡΠΎΡΡ Π±ΡΠ³ΠΎ |
645 |
| 3 | . ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : |
622 |
| 4 | ΠΌΡΠ³ΡΡΣΠ²Π°ΡΠ» ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : |
614 |
| 5 | Π»ΡΡΠ³ΡΠ° - Π±Π°Ρ
ΡΠΈΠ½Π°Π» |
597 |
4-grams:
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | . Π³Π΅ΠΎΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡ ΡΠΎΡΡ Π±ΡΠ³ΠΎ |
630 |
| 2 | Π³Π΅ΠΎΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡ ΡΠΎΡΡ Π±ΡΠ³ΠΎ ΠΌΡΡ
ΡΠ°Π»ΡΡΠ» |
513 |
| 3 | . ΠΌΡΠ³ΡΡΣΠ²Π°ΡΠ» ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : |
483 |
| 4 | Π»ΡΡΠ³ΡΠ° - Π±Π°Ρ
ΡΠΈΠ½Π°Π» Π³ΡΠ°ΡΡΠ½Π° |
471 |
| 5 | - Π±Π°Ρ
ΡΠΈΠ½Π°Π» Π³ΡΠ°ΡΡΠ½Π° Ρ
Π²Π°Π½Π° |
461 |
Key Findings
- Best Perplexity: 2-gram with 502
- Entropy Trend: Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable)
- Coverage: Top-1000 patterns cover ~36% of corpus
- Recommendation: 4-gram or 5-gram for best predictive performance
3. Markov Chain Evaluation
Results
| Context | Avg Entropy | Perplexity | Branching Factor | Unique Contexts | Predictability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.5741 | 1.489 | 3.65 | 105,500 | 42.6% |
| 1 | 1.3715 | 2.587 | 12.28 | 1,091 | 0.0% |
| 2 | 0.1898 | 1.141 | 1.41 | 384,678 | 81.0% |
| 2 | 1.0636 | 2.090 | 6.00 | 13,391 | 0.0% |
| 3 | 0.0614 | 1.043 | 1.11 | 542,652 | 93.9% |
| 3 | 0.8006 | 1.742 | 3.64 | 80,309 | 19.9% |
| 4 | 0.0249 π | 1.017 | 1.04 | 599,240 | 97.5% |
| 4 | 0.5368 π | 1.451 | 2.24 | 292,181 | 46.3% |
Generated Text Samples
Below are text samples generated from each Markov chain model:
Context Size 1:
. Ρ ΡΠ½Π΄Π΅ΡΠΈΠ»ΠΈΡΠ°ΡΡΠ°Π½Π΄Π°ΡΡΠ³ΡΠΎ Μ β² Μ Π» . costumes caucasus circassians caucasus . β anatidae Ρ ΡΠΈΠ·Π°Π½ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠ°Π³Σ..., ΠΊΡΠ°Π³iΠΈΠ΄Π°Π±ΠΈ . Π°ΠΌΠΌΠ° ΡΡΠ³ΠΎ . Π±Π°ΠΉΡΠ°ΠΌΠ°Π» Π»ΡΡΠ³ΡΠ° - Π±Π°ΠΊΡΠ±Π°ΠΊΠΊΡΠ» ΠΊΠ°Π²ΠΊΠ°Π·ΠΈΡΠ± ΠΊΠ°Π»Π΅Π½Π΄Π°Ρ ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : Π³Π°ΡΠ΄Π°ΡΠΈΠΊΠΈ ,- Π°Π±ΠΈΠ»Π΅Π± ) ΠΌΡΠ³ΡΡΣΠ²Π°ΡΠ» ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : Β« Π²Π΅ΡΠ΅ΡΠ° Π½Π° Ρ Π°Π΄ΠΈΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅ ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : ΠΏΠΊΠΎ Β« ΠΌΠΎΠ½ΠΎΠΊΠ»Π΅r Β»
Context Size 2:
ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : Π³ΣΠ°Π½Π΄ΠΈ - Π³ΣΠΎΡΡΠ» ΠΆΠ°Π½ΠΈΠ»ΡΡΠ΄Π° , ΡΠ°Π»ΡΠ΄Π°Π» Π³ΡΡΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ°Π»Π΄Π°ΡΠ° 1869 ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡΠ°ΡΠ»Ρ ΡΡΠ°Π΄Π΅Π³ΡΠ°Π½ . Ρ ΡΠΎΡΠ°Π»ΡΡΠ» ΡΡΠ°...) . ΡΡΠ°ΡΠΎΡΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΄Π΅ ( iii Π³Σ . Π±Π°ΠΉΠ±ΠΈΡ ΡΠΈ ) Π±ΡΠΊΡΠ°Π½Π° ΠΏΠ°ΡΡΠΈΠΊΠΈΡΡΡΠ» ΡΠΈΡΡΠ» , Π³ΡΠ΅Π»Π΄Π°ΡΠ° Ρ Π°Π΄ΡΠ± Π΄Π°Π³ΡΠΈΡΡΠ°Π½Π°Π»Π΄Π΅ .) , Π»Π°ΡΠ΅Π½ ( falco peregrinus ) , ΠΏΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠ»ΠΆΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ 2 Ρ . ii β i Π³ΡΠ°ΡΡΠ°Π±Π°Π·ΡΠ» Π³ΡΠΎΡΡ ΡΠΎΠ΄Π°
Context Size 3:
Π³Π΅ΠΎΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡ ΡΠΎΡΡ Π±ΡΠ³ΠΎ ΠΌΡΡ ΡΠ°Π»ΡΡΠ» ΡΠ΅Π½ΡΠ΅Ρ ΡΡΠΊΠ°ΡΠ°Ρ ΡΠ°Π»Π΄Π°ΡΠ° 50 ΠΊΠΌ - Π»Ρ ΠΆΠ°Π½ΡΠ±ΠΈΡΠ± Π±Π°ΠΊΡΡΣΠ΅ΡΡ ΡΡΠ΄Π΅Ρ ΡΠ½ . Π΄Π΅ΠΌΠΎΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΠΈ.... Π³Π΅ΠΎΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡ ΡΠΎΡΡ Π±ΡΠ³ΠΎ ΡΠ°Π»ΡΠ΄Π°Π» Π³ΡΡΡΠΌΠ°ΡΣΠ°ΠΌΠ° 606 ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡΠ°Π»Ρ Π±ΠΎΡΡ Π°Π»ΡΡΠ΄Π° , ΠΌΡΡ ΡΠ°Π»ΡΡΠ» ΡΠ΅Π½ΡΠ΅Ρ Ρ ΡΠ½Π·Π°Ρ ΡΠ° ΡΠΈΠΌΠ°Π»ΠΈΡ.... ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : ΠΈΡΠ°Π½Π°Π»ΡΡΠ» ΠΎΡΡΠ°Π½Π°Π» * ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : Π°Π·ΠΈΡΠ»ΡΡΠ» ΠΈΡΠ»Π°ΠΌΠΈΡΠ» Ρ ΡΠ°ΡΠ°ΠΊΠ°ΡΡΠ°Π³ΡΠΈ ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : ΡΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ±Π°Π½
Context Size 4:
. Π³Π΅ΠΎΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡ ΡΠΎΡΡ Π±ΡΠ³ΠΎ ΠΌΡΡ ΡΠ°Π»ΡΡΠ» ΠΌΠ°ΡΠΊΠ°Π· Π»ΡΠ°ΡΠ°ΡΣΠ°ΡΠ° 11 ΠΊΠΌ - Π°Π»Ρ ΡΠΈΠΌΠ°Π»Π°Π»Π΄Π΅Ρ ΡΠ½ . Π΄Π΅ΠΌΠΎΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡ ΠΊΠΊΠΎΠ»Π° ΠΌΠΎΠ½ΠΎΡΡ...Π³Π΅ΠΎΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡ ΡΠΎΡΡ Π±ΡΠ³ΠΎ ΠΌΡΡ ΡΠ°Π»ΡΡΠ» ΡΠ΅Π½ΡΠ΅Ρ Π΄Π΅ΡΠ»Π°Ρ ΣΠ°ΡΠ°Π»Π΄Π°ΡΠ° 13 ΠΊΠΌ - Π»Ρ ΡΠΈΠΊΣΠΊΣΠ°Π΄ . ΠΈΡΡΠΎΡΠΈΡ 1886 ΡΠΎΠ½Π°Π»ΡΡΠ» Π±Π°Ρ.... ΠΌΡΠ³ΡΡΣΠ²Π°ΡΠ» ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : Π³ΣΠ°Π½Π΄Π°Π»Π°Π·ΡΠ» Π±ΠΎΠ» ΡΠ°Π³ΣΠΈ ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ : ΠΊΠ°Π²ΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π»ΡΡΠ» ΠΈΠΌΠ°ΠΌΠ·Π°Π±ΠΈ
Key Findings
- Best Predictability: Context-4 with 97.5% predictability
- Branching Factor: Decreases with context size (more deterministic)
- Memory Trade-off: Larger contexts require more storage (292,181 contexts)
- Recommendation: Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation
4. Vocabulary Analysis
Statistics
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Vocabulary Size | 38,576 |
| Total Tokens | 474,364 |
| Mean Frequency | 12.30 |
| Median Frequency | 3 |
| Frequency Std Dev | 81.10 |
Most Common Words
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Π²Π° | 7,190 |
| 2 | ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡ | 6,086 |
| 3 | Π±ΡΠ³ΠΎ | 5,703 |
| 4 | Π±ΡΠ³Π΅Π± | 2,911 |
| 5 | ΠΊΠΊΠΎΠ»Π° | 2,903 |
| 6 | ΡΠΎΡΡ | 2,847 |
| 7 | ΠΌΡΡ ΡΠ°Π»ΡΡΠ» | 2,671 |
| 8 | Π³ΡΠ΅Π± | 2,187 |
| 9 | Π΄Π°Π³ΡΠΈΡΡΠ°Π½Π°Π»ΡΡΠ» | 1,923 |
| 10 | ΡΠΎΡΠ΄Π°Π» | 1,903 |
Least Common Words (from vocabulary)
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | ΡΡΠΊΡΡΠ°ΠΌΠ°Ρ ΡΠΈ | 2 |
| 2 | ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΠΈΠ½ΡΡΠΌΠ°Π»Π΄Π΅ | 2 |
| 3 | ΠΊΡΡΠ»Π΅ΡΣΠΌΠ°Π³ΠΈ | 2 |
| 4 | Π³ΡΠ°ΡΠΊΣΠ°ΡΡΠ½ΠΈΠ± | 2 |
| 5 | ΠΌΠ°Ρ ΣΠ°ΡΠ³ΠΈ | 2 |
| 6 | ΠΏΠΈΠ»ΠΈΠ±Ρ ΠΈΡΠ°Π»ΡΡΠ» | 2 |
| 7 | Π·Π°ΠΏΠΎΠ²Π΅Π΄Π½ΠΈΠΊΠ°Π»Π΄Π° | 2 |
| 8 | ΠΏΠΈΠ»ΠΈΠ±Ρ ΠΈΡ | 2 |
| 9 | Π»ΡΠ°Π»ΡΠ°Π΄ΡΠ» | 2 |
| 10 | Ρ ΣΠ°Π½ΡΣΠΈ | 2 |
Zipf's Law Analysis
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Zipf Coefficient | 0.9487 |
| RΒ² (Goodness of Fit) | 0.992879 |
| Adherence Quality | excellent |
Coverage Analysis
| Top N Words | Coverage |
|---|---|
| Top 100 | 22.2% |
| Top 1,000 | 49.8% |
| Top 5,000 | 72.6% |
| Top 10,000 | 82.2% |
Key Findings
- Zipf Compliance: RΒ²=0.9929 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law
- High Frequency Dominance: Top 100 words cover 22.2% of corpus
- Long Tail: 28,576 words needed for remaining 17.8% coverage
5. Word Embeddings Evaluation
Model Comparison
| Model | Vocab Size | Dimension | Avg Norm | Std Norm | Isotropy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mono_32d | 12,900 | 32 | 4.114 | 0.854 | 0.8716 π |
| mono_64d | 12,900 | 64 | 4.625 | 0.771 | 0.7752 |
| mono_128d | 12,900 | 128 | 4.775 | 0.759 | 0.3123 |
| embeddings_enhanced | 0 | 0 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.0000 |
Key Findings
- Best Isotropy: mono_32d with 0.8716 (more uniform distribution)
- Dimension Trade-off: Higher dimensions capture more semantics but reduce isotropy
- Vocabulary Coverage: All models cover 12,900 words
- Recommendation: 100d for balanced semantic capture and efficiency
6. Summary & Recommendations
Production Recommendations
| Component | Recommended | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Tokenizer | 32k BPE | Best compression (4.58x) with low UNK rate |
| N-gram | 5-gram | Lowest perplexity (502) |
| Markov | Context-4 | Highest predictability (97.5%) |
| 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) Γ 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.
RΒ² (Coefficient of Determination)
Definition: Measures how well the linear fit explains the frequency-rank relationship. Ranges from 0 to 1.
Intuition: RΒ² near 1.0 means the data closely follows Zipf's law; lower values indicate deviation from expected word frequency patterns.
What to seek: RΒ² > 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
- Compare within model families: Metrics are most meaningful when comparing models of the same type (e.g., 8k vs 64k tokenizer).
- Consider trade-offs: Better performance on one metric often comes at the cost of another (e.g., compression vs. OOV rate).
- Context matters: Optimal values depend on downstream tasks. Text generation may prioritize different metrics than classification.
- Corpus influence: All metrics are influenced by corpus characteristics. Wikipedia text differs from social media or literature.
- 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
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
- π Website: wikilangs.org
- π€ Models: huggingface.co/wikilangs
- π Data: wikipedia-monthly
- π€ Author: Omar Kamali
Generated by Wikilangs Models Pipeline
Report Date: 2025-12-27 20:39:38











