|
|
--- |
|
|
language: bm |
|
|
language_name: Bambara |
|
|
language_family: atlantic_other |
|
|
tags: |
|
|
- wikilangs |
|
|
- nlp |
|
|
- tokenizer |
|
|
- embeddings |
|
|
- n-gram |
|
|
- markov |
|
|
- wikipedia |
|
|
- feature-extraction |
|
|
- sentence-similarity |
|
|
- tokenization |
|
|
- n-grams |
|
|
- markov-chain |
|
|
- text-mining |
|
|
- fasttext |
|
|
- babelvec |
|
|
- vocabulous |
|
|
- vocabulary |
|
|
- monolingual |
|
|
- family-atlantic_other |
|
|
license: mit |
|
|
library_name: wikilangs |
|
|
pipeline_tag: text-generation |
|
|
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: 4.018 |
|
|
- name: best_isotropy |
|
|
type: isotropy |
|
|
value: 0.3203 |
|
|
- name: vocabulary_size |
|
|
type: vocab |
|
|
value: 0 |
|
|
generated: 2026-01-03 |
|
|
--- |
|
|
|
|
|
# Bambara - Wikilangs Models |
|
|
## Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study |
|
|
|
|
|
This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on **Bambara** Wikipedia data. |
|
|
We analyze tokenizers, n-gram models, Markov chains, vocabulary statistics, and word embeddings. |
|
|
|
|
|
## ๐ Repository Contents |
|
|
|
|
|
### Models & Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
- Tokenizers (8k, 16k, 32k, 64k) |
|
|
- N-gram models (2, 3, 4, 5-gram) |
|
|
- Markov chains (context of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5) |
|
|
- Subword N-gram and Markov chains |
|
|
- Embeddings in various sizes and dimensions (aligned and unaligned) |
|
|
- Language Vocabulary |
|
|
- Language Statistics |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
### Analysis and Evaluation |
|
|
|
|
|
- [1. Tokenizer Evaluation](#1-tokenizer-evaluation) |
|
|
- [2. N-gram Model Evaluation](#2-n-gram-model-evaluation) |
|
|
- [3. Markov Chain Evaluation](#3-markov-chain-evaluation) |
|
|
- [4. Vocabulary Analysis](#4-vocabulary-analysis) |
|
|
- [5. Word Embeddings Evaluation](#5-word-embeddings-evaluation) |
|
|
- [6. Morphological Analysis (Experimental)](#6--morphological-analysis-experimental) |
|
|
- [7. Summary & Recommendations](#7-summary--recommendations) |
|
|
- [Metrics Glossary](#appendix-metrics-glossary--interpretation-guide) |
|
|
- [Visualizations Index](#visualizations-index) |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
## 1. Tokenizer Evaluation |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
### Results |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab Size | Compression | Avg Token Len | UNK Rate | Total Tokens | |
|
|
|------------|-------------|---------------|----------|--------------| |
|
|
| **8k** | 3.554x | 3.56 | 1.4079% | 103,986 | |
|
|
| **16k** | 3.839x | 3.85 | 1.5205% | 96,281 | |
|
|
| **32k** | 4.018x ๐ | 4.03 | 1.5915% | 91,989 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Tokenization Examples |
|
|
|
|
|
Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size: |
|
|
|
|
|
**Sample 1:** `TusyษninBailleul, Charles. Dictionnaire franรงais-bambara. Bamako: รditions Donni...` |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab | Tokens | Count | |
|
|
|-------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 8k | `โtu syษn inbailleul , โcharles . โdictionnaire โfranรงais - bambara ... (+8 more)` | 18 | |
|
|
| 16k | `โtusyษn inbailleul , โcharles . โdictionnaire โfranรงais - bambara . ... (+7 more)` | 17 | |
|
|
| 32k | `โtusyษn inbailleul , โcharles . โdictionnaire โfranรงais - bambara . ... (+7 more)` | 17 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**Sample 2:** `Brains ye Faransi ka dugu ye. Dugumogo be taa jon yooro Sababou Kษfษ sira Brains...` |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab | Tokens | Count | |
|
|
|-------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 8k | `โbrains โye โfaransi โka โdugu โye . โdugumogo โbe โtaa ... (+10 more)` | 20 | |
|
|
| 16k | `โbrains โye โfaransi โka โdugu โye . โdugumogo โbe โtaa ... (+10 more)` | 20 | |
|
|
| 32k | `โbrains โye โfaransi โka โdugu โye . โdugumogo โbe โtaa ... (+10 more)` | 20 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**Sample 3:** `KolanfuBailleul, Charles. Dictionnaire franรงais-bambara. Bamako: รditions Donniy...` |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab | Tokens | Count | |
|
|
|-------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 8k | `โkolan fu bailleul , โcharles . โdictionnaire โfranรงais - bambara ... (+8 more)` | 18 | |
|
|
| 16k | `โkolan fubailleul , โcharles . โdictionnaire โfranรงais - bambara . ... (+7 more)` | 17 | |
|
|
| 32k | `โkolanfubailleul , โcharles . โdictionnaire โfranรงais - bambara . โbamako ... (+6 more)` | 16 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Compression:** 32k achieves 4.018x compression |
|
|
- **Lowest UNK Rate:** 8k with 1.4079% 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 | Variant | Perplexity | Entropy | Unique N-grams | Top-100 Coverage | Top-1000 Coverage | |
|
|
|--------|---------|------------|---------|----------------|------------------|-------------------| |
|
|
| **2-gram** | Word | 917 | 9.84 | 2,056 | 40.6% | 82.5% | |
|
|
| **2-gram** | Subword | 271 ๐ | 8.08 | 1,816 | 67.8% | 98.7% | |
|
|
| **3-gram** | Word | 757 | 9.56 | 2,167 | 44.4% | 79.2% | |
|
|
| **3-gram** | Subword | 1,867 | 10.87 | 9,795 | 30.1% | 75.0% | |
|
|
| **4-gram** | Word | 1,888 | 10.88 | 5,346 | 34.2% | 52.7% | |
|
|
| **4-gram** | Subword | 7,991 | 12.96 | 35,277 | 14.7% | 47.2% | |
|
|
| **5-gram** | Word | 1,411 | 10.46 | 4,196 | 36.6% | 54.4% | |
|
|
| **5-gram** | Subword | 17,676 | 14.11 | 58,257 | 10.4% | 34.3% | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Top 5 N-grams by Size |
|
|
|
|
|
**2-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `ka dugu` | 524 | |
|
|
| 2 | `รฉditions donniya` | 419 | |
|
|
| 3 | `bambara bamako` | 419 | |
|
|
| 4 | `charles dictionnaire` | 419 | |
|
|
| 5 | `franรงais bambara` | 419 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**3-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `dictionnaire franรงais bambara` | 419 | |
|
|
| 2 | `charles dictionnaire franรงais` | 419 | |
|
|
| 3 | `franรงais bambara bamako` | 419 | |
|
|
| 4 | `bambara bamako รฉditions` | 419 | |
|
|
| 5 | `รฉditions donniya isbn` | 419 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**4-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `bamako รฉditions donniya isbn` | 419 | |
|
|
| 2 | `bambara bamako รฉditions donniya` | 419 | |
|
|
| 3 | `franรงais bambara bamako รฉditions` | 419 | |
|
|
| 4 | `dictionnaire franรงais bambara bamako` | 419 | |
|
|
| 5 | `charles dictionnaire franรงais bambara` | 419 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**5-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `bambara bamako รฉditions donniya isbn` | 419 | |
|
|
| 2 | `charles dictionnaire franรงais bambara bamako` | 419 | |
|
|
| 3 | `dictionnaire franรงais bambara bamako รฉditions` | 419 | |
|
|
| 4 | `franรงais bambara bamako รฉditions donniya` | 419 | |
|
|
| 5 | `bamako รฉditions donniya isbn sababou` | 415 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**2-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `a _` | 23,457 | |
|
|
| 2 | `_ k` | 13,682 | |
|
|
| 3 | `a n` | 13,488 | |
|
|
| 4 | `n _` | 12,358 | |
|
|
| 5 | `i _` | 9,793 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**3-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `_ k a` | 6,339 | |
|
|
| 2 | `k a _` | 4,941 | |
|
|
| 3 | `_ y e` | 4,556 | |
|
|
| 4 | `a n _` | 3,990 | |
|
|
| 5 | `n i _` | 3,929 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**4-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `_ k a _` | 4,284 | |
|
|
| 2 | `_ y e _` | 3,187 | |
|
|
| 3 | `_ b ษ _` | 1,824 | |
|
|
| 4 | `_ n i _` | 1,804 | |
|
|
| 5 | `_ m i n` | 1,782 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**5-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `a m a n a` | 1,291 | |
|
|
| 2 | `_ d u g u` | 1,271 | |
|
|
| 3 | `_ m i n _` | 1,168 | |
|
|
| 4 | `j a m a n` | 1,146 | |
|
|
| 5 | `a _ k a _` | 1,065 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Perplexity:** 2-gram (subword) with 271 |
|
|
- **Entropy Trend:** Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable) |
|
|
- **Coverage:** Top-1000 patterns cover ~34% of corpus |
|
|
- **Recommendation:** 4-gram or 5-gram for best predictive performance |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
## 3. Markov Chain Evaluation |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
### Results |
|
|
|
|
|
| Context | Variant | Avg Entropy | Perplexity | Branching Factor | Unique Contexts | Predictability | |
|
|
|---------|---------|-------------|------------|------------------|-----------------|----------------| |
|
|
| **1** | Word | 0.5962 | 1.512 | 3.33 | 17,463 | 40.4% | |
|
|
| **1** | Subword | 1.1592 | 2.233 | 8.34 | 482 | 0.0% | |
|
|
| **2** | Word | 0.2012 | 1.150 | 1.41 | 57,826 | 79.9% | |
|
|
| **2** | Subword | 0.9871 | 1.982 | 5.02 | 4,012 | 1.3% | |
|
|
| **3** | Word | 0.0638 | 1.045 | 1.10 | 81,186 | 93.6% | |
|
|
| **3** | Subword | 0.7347 | 1.664 | 3.14 | 20,106 | 26.5% | |
|
|
| **4** | Word | 0.0198 ๐ | 1.014 | 1.03 | 88,526 | 98.0% | |
|
|
| **4** | Subword | 0.5000 | 1.414 | 2.08 | 63,024 | 50.0% | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Generated Text Samples (Word-based) |
|
|
|
|
|
Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model: |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 1:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `ka dugu ye ษฒ ล ษ ษฒ ka k u la litwanie duchy belebele naninan ye` |
|
|
2. `ye kan kaan kankan mali duo dษnkilidalaw ye balikukalan ni faransi ka bษ pretoria tษgษ ta` |
|
|
3. `a ka kษ mษgษ nษrษmaw ye nga u ko majigilenya majigin kษrษtalenba ala kelenpe ani san` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 2:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `charles dictionnaire franรงais bambara bamako รฉditions donniya isbn sababou kษkan sirilanw basshunter...` |
|
|
2. `dictionnaire franรงais bambara bamako รฉditions donniya isbn sababou kษkan sirilanw michael jackson ka...` |
|
|
3. `donniya isbn sababou kษkan sirilanw ourebia ourebi nkolonin thryonomys swinderianus kษษฒinษ nkansole ...` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 3:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `bambara bamako รฉditions donniya isbn sababou kษkan sirilanw herpestes ichneumon` |
|
|
2. `รฉditions donniya isbn sababou kษkan sirilanw leptailurus serval` |
|
|
3. `bamako รฉditions donniya isbn sababou dutafilm` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 4:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `bambara bamako รฉditions donniya isbn sababou kษkan sirilanw tragelaphus spekii` |
|
|
2. `dictionnaire franรงais bambara bamako รฉditions donniya isbn sababou kษkan sirilanw mungos mungo` |
|
|
3. `franรงais bambara bamako รฉditions donniya isbn sababou kษkan sirilanw papio anubis` |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Generated Text Samples (Subword-based) |
|
|
|
|
|
Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model: |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 1:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `_t_edo_ba_faainษ` |
|
|
2. `afoghmanแป_ne,_ji` |
|
|
3. `nyerayedambรฒrษnk` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 2:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `a_aniyala:_zara._` |
|
|
2. `_kara_baridalatษn` |
|
|
3. `anginkun_walf-c._` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 3:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `_kan_fila-jษnjษ_ye` |
|
|
2. `ka_san_na_ka_kษrษl` |
|
|
3. `_ye_dugu._virgia,_` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 4:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `_ka_ษฒa._shiya_gossy` |
|
|
2. `_ye_danmasen_baara_` |
|
|
3. `_bษ_daษฒฮต_minnu_bษ_a` |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Predictability:** Context-4 (word) with 98.0% predictability |
|
|
- **Branching Factor:** Decreases with context size (more deterministic) |
|
|
- **Memory Trade-off:** Larger contexts require more storage (63,024 contexts) |
|
|
- **Recommendation:** Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
## 4. Vocabulary Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
### Statistics |
|
|
|
|
|
| Metric | Value | |
|
|
|--------|-------| |
|
|
| Vocabulary Size | 6,824 | |
|
|
| Total Tokens | 94,926 | |
|
|
| Mean Frequency | 13.91 | |
|
|
| Median Frequency | 3 | |
|
|
| Frequency Std Dev | 106.26 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Most Common Words |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Word | Frequency | |
|
|
|------|------|-----------| |
|
|
| 1 | ye | 4,371 | |
|
|
| 2 | ka | 4,340 | |
|
|
| 3 | a | 3,278 | |
|
|
| 4 | la | 1,926 | |
|
|
| 5 | ni | 1,899 | |
|
|
| 6 | bษ | 1,834 | |
|
|
| 7 | na | 1,623 | |
|
|
| 8 | min | 1,189 | |
|
|
| 9 | o | 1,149 | |
|
|
| 10 | ani | 1,076 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Least Common Words (from vocabulary) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Word | Frequency | |
|
|
|------|------|-----------| |
|
|
| 1 | abubakari | 2 | |
|
|
| 2 | candaces | 2 | |
|
|
| 3 | ameniras | 2 | |
|
|
| 4 | kandasi | 2 | |
|
|
| 5 | qore | 2 | |
|
|
| 6 | candace | 2 | |
|
|
| 7 | amษn | 2 | |
|
|
| 8 | bajiw | 2 | |
|
|
| 9 | dunbagaw | 2 | |
|
|
| 10 | mouvement | 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Zipf's Law Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
| Metric | Value | |
|
|
|--------|-------| |
|
|
| Zipf Coefficient | 1.0058 | |
|
|
| Rยฒ (Goodness of Fit) | 0.984137 | |
|
|
| Adherence Quality | **excellent** | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Coverage Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
| Top N Words | Coverage | |
|
|
|-------------|----------| |
|
|
| Top 100 | 52.4% | |
|
|
| Top 1,000 | 79.3% | |
|
|
| Top 5,000 | 96.2% | |
|
|
| Top 10,000 | 0.0% | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Zipf Compliance:** Rยฒ=0.9841 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law |
|
|
- **High Frequency Dominance:** Top 100 words cover 52.4% of corpus |
|
|
- **Long Tail:** -3,176 words needed for remaining 100.0% coverage |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
## 5. Word Embeddings Evaluation |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### 5.1 Cross-Lingual Alignment |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### 5.2 Model Comparison |
|
|
|
|
|
| Model | Dimension | Isotropy | Semantic Density | Alignment R@1 | Alignment R@10 | |
|
|
|-------|-----------|----------|------------------|---------------|----------------| |
|
|
| **mono_32d** | 32 | 0.3203 ๐ | 0.5260 | N/A | N/A | |
|
|
| **mono_64d** | 64 | 0.0572 | 0.5107 | N/A | N/A | |
|
|
| **mono_128d** | 128 | 0.0109 | 0.5108 | N/A | N/A | |
|
|
| **aligned_32d** | 32 | 0.3203 | 0.5505 | 0.0040 | 0.0600 | |
|
|
| **aligned_64d** | 64 | 0.0572 | 0.5015 | 0.0300 | 0.1740 | |
|
|
| **aligned_128d** | 128 | 0.0109 | 0.5061 | 0.0400 | 0.1700 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Isotropy:** mono_32d with 0.3203 (more uniform distribution) |
|
|
- **Semantic Density:** Average pairwise similarity of 0.5176. Lower values indicate better semantic separation. |
|
|
- **Alignment Quality:** Aligned models achieve up to 4.0% R@1 in cross-lingual retrieval. |
|
|
- **Recommendation:** 128d aligned for best cross-lingual performance |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
## 6. Morphological Analysis (Experimental) |
|
|
|
|
|
This section presents an automated morphological analysis derived from the statistical divergence between word-level and subword-level models. By analyzing where subword predictability spikes and where word-level coverage fails, we can infer linguistic structures without supervised data. |
|
|
|
|
|
### 6.1 Productivity & Complexity |
|
|
|
|
|
| Metric | Value | Interpretation | Recommendation | |
|
|
|--------|-------|----------------|----------------| |
|
|
| Productivity Index | **5.000** | High morphological productivity | Reliable analysis | |
|
|
| Idiomaticity Gap | **0.589** | High formulaic/idiomatic content | - | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 6.2 Affix Inventory (Productive Units) |
|
|
|
|
|
These are the most productive prefixes and suffixes identified by sampling the vocabulary for global substitutability patterns. A unit is considered an affix if stripping it leaves a valid stem that appears in other contexts. |
|
|
|
|
|
#### Productive Prefixes |
|
|
| Prefix | Examples | |
|
|
|--------|----------| |
|
|
| `-ma` | masurunyala, mansaya, magana | |
|
|
|
|
|
#### Productive Suffixes |
|
|
| Suffix | Examples | |
|
|
|--------|----------| |
|
|
| `-a` | cษnimusoya, fa, masurunyala | |
|
|
| `-an` | jigilan, dilan, irisikan | |
|
|
| `-en` | pen, tobilen, maliden | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 6.3 Bound Stems (Lexical Roots) |
|
|
|
|
|
Bound stems are high-frequency subword units that are semantically cohesive but rarely appear as standalone words. These often correspond to the 'core' of a word that requires inflection or derivation to be valid. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Stem | Cohesion | Substitutability | Examples | |
|
|
|------|----------|------------------|----------| |
|
|
| `alan` | 1.63x | 24 contexts | balan, kalan, jalan | |
|
|
| `aman` | 1.32x | 25 contexts | daman, baman, saman | |
|
|
| `riya` | 1.72x | 11 contexts | miriya, sariya, suriya | |
|
|
| `aara` | 1.66x | 12 contexts | naara, yaara, taara | |
|
|
| `alen` | 1.36x | 20 contexts | salen, nalen, dalen | |
|
|
| `ษgษn` | 1.72x | 10 contexts | ษฒษgษn, nษgษn, dษgษn | |
|
|
| `anka` | 1.52x | 13 contexts | yankan, kankan, dankan | |
|
|
| `elen` | 1.56x | 12 contexts | selen, kelen, yelen | |
|
|
| `amin` | 1.42x | 15 contexts | lamini, damina, daminรจ | |
|
|
| `ษbษn` | 1.74x | 8 contexts | sษbษn, sษbษnw, sษbษnni | |
|
|
| `nkan` | 1.37x | 14 contexts | yankan, kankan, benkan | |
|
|
| `ilan` | 1.33x | 13 contexts | tilan, dilan, filan | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 6.4 Affix Compatibility (Co-occurrence) |
|
|
|
|
|
This table shows which prefixes and suffixes most frequently co-occur on the same stems, revealing the 'stacking' rules of the language's morphology. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Prefix | Suffix | Frequency | Examples | |
|
|
|--------|--------|-----------|----------| |
|
|
| `-ma` | `-a` | 20 words | mansamara, masa | |
|
|
| `-ma` | `-an` | 8 words | manyan, man | |
|
|
| `-ma` | `-en` | 5 words | maralen, madonnen | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 6.5 Recursive Morpheme Segmentation |
|
|
|
|
|
Using **Recursive Hierarchical Substitutability**, we decompose complex words into their constituent morphemes. This approach handles nested affixes (e.g., `prefix-prefix-root-suffix`). |
|
|
|
|
|
| Word | Suggested Split | Confidence | Stem | |
|
|
|------|-----------------|------------|------| |
|
|
| datugunen | **`datugun-en`** | 4.5 | `datugun` | |
|
|
| masurunya | **`ma-surunya`** | 4.5 | `surunya` | |
|
|
| maninkakan | **`ma-ninkak-an`** | 3.0 | `ninkak` | |
|
|
| masafugulan | **`ma-safugul-an`** | 3.0 | `safugul` | |
|
|
| mandenkan | **`ma-ndenk-an`** | 3.0 | `ndenk` | |
|
|
| wolonwulanan | **`wolonwul-an-an`** | 3.0 | `wolonwul` | |
|
|
| maramafen | **`ma-ramaf-en`** | 3.0 | `ramaf` | |
|
|
| kษrษnyanfan | **`kษrษnyanf-an`** | 1.5 | `kษrษnyanf` | |
|
|
| tamashiyen | **`tamashiy-en`** | 1.5 | `tamashiy` | |
|
|
| quotidien | **`quotidi-en`** | 1.5 | `quotidi` | |
|
|
| bolofaran | **`bolofar-an`** | 1.5 | `bolofar` | |
|
|
| marcusenius | **`ma-rcusenius`** | 1.5 | `rcusenius` | |
|
|
| manuskrip | **`ma-nuskrip`** | 1.5 | `nuskrip` | |
|
|
| sฮตbฮตnnisen | **`sฮตbฮตnnis-en`** | 1.5 | `sฮตbฮตnnis` | |
|
|
| kษnษntษnnan | **`kษnษntษnn-an`** | 1.5 | `kษnษntษnn` | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 6.6 Linguistic Interpretation |
|
|
|
|
|
> **Automated Insight:** |
|
|
The language Bambara shows high morphological productivity. The subword models are significantly more efficient than word models, suggesting a rich system of affixation or compounding. |
|
|
|
|
|
> **Note on Idiomaticity:** The high Idiomaticity Gap suggests a large number of frequent multi-word expressions or formulaic sequences that are statistically distinct from their component parts. |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
## 7. Summary & Recommendations |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
### Production Recommendations |
|
|
|
|
|
| Component | Recommended | Rationale | |
|
|
|-----------|-------------|-----------| |
|
|
| Tokenizer | **32k BPE** | Best compression (4.02x) | |
|
|
| N-gram | **2-gram** | Lowest perplexity (271) | |
|
|
| Markov | **Context-4** | Highest predictability (98.0%) | |
|
|
| 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](https://huggingface.co/datasets/omarkamali/wikipedia-monthly) - a monthly snapshot of Wikipedia articles across 300+ languages. |
|
|
|
|
|
### Project |
|
|
|
|
|
A project by **[Wikilangs](https://wikilangs.org)** - Open-source NLP models for every Wikipedia language. |
|
|
|
|
|
### Maintainer |
|
|
|
|
|
[Omar Kamali](https://omarkamali.com) - [Omneity Labs](https://omneitylabs.com) |
|
|
|
|
|
### Citation |
|
|
|
|
|
If you use these models in your research, please cite: |
|
|
|
|
|
```bibtex |
|
|
@misc{wikilangs2025, |
|
|
author = {Kamali, Omar}, |
|
|
title = {Wikilangs: Open NLP Models for Wikipedia Languages}, |
|
|
year = {2025}, |
|
|
doi = {10.5281/zenodo.18073153}, |
|
|
publisher = {Zenodo}, |
|
|
url = {https://huggingface.co/wikilangs} |
|
|
institution = {Omneity Labs} |
|
|
} |
|
|
``` |
|
|
|
|
|
### License |
|
|
|
|
|
MIT License - Free for academic and commercial use. |
|
|
|
|
|
### Links |
|
|
|
|
|
- ๐ Website: [wikilangs.org](https://wikilangs.org) |
|
|
- ๐ค Models: [huggingface.co/wikilangs](https://huggingface.co/wikilangs) |
|
|
- ๐ Data: [wikipedia-monthly](https://huggingface.co/datasets/omarkamali/wikipedia-monthly) |
|
|
- ๐ค Author: [Omar Kamali](https://huggingface.co/omarkamali) |
|
|
- ๐ค Sponsor: [Featherless AI](https://featherless.ai) |
|
|
--- |
|
|
*Generated by Wikilangs Models Pipeline* |
|
|
|
|
|
*Report Date: 2026-01-03 19:12:39* |
|
|
|