Gilaki - Wikilangs Models
Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study
This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on Gilaki Wikipedia data. We analyze tokenizers, n-gram models, Markov chains, vocabulary statistics, and word embeddings.
📋 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
- 2. N-gram Model Evaluation
- 3. Markov Chain Evaluation
- 4. Vocabulary Analysis
- 5. Word Embeddings Evaluation
- 6. Morphological Analysis (Experimental)
- 7. Summary & Recommendations
- Metrics Glossary
- Visualizations Index
1. Tokenizer Evaluation
Results
| Vocab Size | Compression | Avg Token Len | UNK Rate | Total Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8k | 3.040x | 3.04 | 0.8455% | 224,022 |
| 16k | 3.382x | 3.39 | 0.9407% | 201,331 |
| 32k | 3.692x | 3.70 | 1.0270% | 184,426 |
| 64k | 3.924x 🏆 | 3.93 | 1.0915% | 173,524 |
Tokenization Examples
Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size:
Sample 1: تولد من هست در جریان باشید😅 ایتفاقان تولدان مرگان توشکه رده : سیا ما روزان رده:ت...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | ▁تول د ▁من ▁هست ▁در ▁ج ریان ▁باش ید 😅 ... (+16 more) |
26 |
| 16k | ▁تولد ▁من ▁هست ▁در ▁ج ریان ▁باش ید 😅 ▁ایتفاقان ... (+15 more) |
25 |
| 32k | ▁تولد ▁من ▁هست ▁در ▁جریان ▁باشید 😅 ▁ایتفاقان ▁تولدان ▁مرگان ... (+13 more) |
23 |
| 64k | ▁تولد ▁من ▁هست ▁در ▁جریان ▁باشید 😅 ▁ایتفاقان ▁تولدان ▁مرگان ... (+13 more) |
23 |
Sample 2: کیاسرا ایسم ایته جی روستاهان لفمجان دهستان ، لاجان شهرستان مرکزی بخش ایسه اوستان...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | ▁کی اسرا ▁ایسم ▁ایته ▁جی ▁روستاهان ▁لفمجان ▁دهستان ▁، ▁لاجان ... (+11 more) |
21 |
| 16k | ▁کی اسرا ▁ایسم ▁ایته ▁جی ▁روستاهان ▁لفمجان ▁دهستان ▁، ▁لاجان ... (+11 more) |
21 |
| 32k | ▁کی اسرا ▁ایسم ▁ایته ▁جی ▁روستاهان ▁لفمجان ▁دهستان ▁، ▁لاجان ... (+11 more) |
21 |
| 64k | ▁کیاسرا ▁ایسم ▁ایته ▁جی ▁روستاهان ▁لفمجان ▁دهستان ▁، ▁لاجان ▁شهرستان ... (+10 more) |
20 |
Sample 3: بیلاژ محله ایسم ایته جی روستاهان آهندان دهستان ، لاجان شهرستان مرکزی بخش ایسه او...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | ▁بی لا ژ ▁محله ▁ایسم ▁ایته ▁جی ▁روستاهان ▁آهندان ▁دهستان ... (+13 more) |
23 |
| 16k | ▁بی لا ژ ▁محله ▁ایسم ▁ایته ▁جی ▁روستاهان ▁آهندان ▁دهستان ... (+13 more) |
23 |
| 32k | ▁بیلا ژ ▁محله ▁ایسم ▁ایته ▁جی ▁روستاهان ▁آهندان ▁دهستان ▁، ... (+12 more) |
22 |
| 64k | ▁بیلا ژ ▁محله ▁ایسم ▁ایته ▁جی ▁روستاهان ▁آهندان ▁دهستان ▁، ... (+12 more) |
22 |
Key Findings
- Best Compression: 64k achieves 3.924x compression
- Lowest UNK Rate: 8k with 0.8455% 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 | 452 | 8.82 | 22,372 | 68.3% | 84.5% |
| 2-gram | Subword | 289 🏆 | 8.17 | 5,138 | 70.6% | 97.4% |
| 3-gram | Word | 859 | 9.75 | 38,047 | 59.7% | 79.2% |
| 3-gram | Subword | 1,264 | 10.30 | 39,676 | 47.4% | 79.1% |
| 4-gram | Word | 1,740 | 10.76 | 75,476 | 51.1% | 71.1% |
| 4-gram | Subword | 3,145 | 11.62 | 166,775 | 39.8% | 68.3% |
| 5-gram | Word | 2,593 | 11.34 | 80,402 | 46.0% | 65.5% |
| 5-gram | Subword | 5,057 | 12.30 | 329,311 | 36.7% | 64.9% |
Top 5 N-grams by Size
2-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | ٚ مئن |
95,400 |
| 2 | أ شأر |
62,694 |
| 3 | ٚ شأرستان |
56,570 |
| 4 | شأرستان ٚ |
49,032 |
| 5 | ايسه گه |
41,300 |
3-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | ٚ مئن نهأ |
40,846 |
| 2 | شأرستان ٚ مئن |
36,418 |
| 3 | ايته جه آمريکا |
34,104 |
| 4 | ٚ شأرستان ٚ |
33,251 |
| 5 | شأران ايسه گه |
31,561 |
4-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | شأرستان ٚ مئن نهأ |
36,381 |
| 2 | ٚ مئن نهأ ؤ |
31,068 |
| 3 | آمريکا آمار ٚ مرکز |
31,056 |
| 4 | ؤ آمريکا آمار ٚ |
31,054 |
| 5 | نفر اعلام بۊگۊده سربس |
31,054 |
5-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | ؤ آمريکا آمار ٚ مرکز |
31,054 |
| 2 | نهأ ؤ آمريکا آمار ٚ |
31,053 |
| 3 | ٚ مئن نهأ ؤ آمريکا |
31,053 |
| 4 | شأرستان ٚ مئن نهأ ؤ |
31,051 |
| 5 | مئن نهأ ؤ آمريکا آمار |
31,051 |
2-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | ا ن |
344,074 |
| 2 | _ٚ _ |
304,817 |
| 3 | ه _ |
274,936 |
| 4 | _ ش |
270,095 |
| 5 | _ ا |
227,254 |
3-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | _ ش أ |
217,137 |
| 2 | ش أ ر |
216,916 |
| 3 | س ت ا |
152,303 |
| 4 | _ٚ _ م |
132,016 |
| 5 | ت ا ن |
125,309 |
4-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | _ ش أ ر |
216,867 |
| 2 | س ت ا ن |
123,160 |
| 3 | ا ن _ٚ _ |
107,779 |
| 4 | _ م ئ ن |
103,927 |
| 5 | _ٚ _ م ئ |
95,459 |
5-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | _ٚ _ م ئ ن |
95,452 |
| 2 | ر س ت ا ن |
92,229 |
| 3 | ش أ ر س ت |
87,042 |
| 4 | أ ر س ت ا |
87,041 |
| 5 | _ ش أ ر س |
87,035 |
Key Findings
- Best Perplexity: 2-gram (subword) with 289
- Entropy Trend: Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable)
- Coverage: Top-1000 patterns cover ~65% 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 | 0.5992 | 1.515 | 3.83 | 109,448 | 40.1% |
| 1 | Subword | 1.2417 | 2.365 | 11.40 | 995 | 0.0% |
| 2 | Word | 0.1612 | 1.118 | 1.39 | 416,225 | 83.9% |
| 2 | Subword | 1.0373 | 2.052 | 6.72 | 11,334 | 0.0% |
| 3 | Word | 0.0547 | 1.039 | 1.14 | 571,714 | 94.5% |
| 3 | Subword | 0.7917 | 1.731 | 3.86 | 76,144 | 20.8% |
| 4 | Word | 0.0260 🏆 | 1.018 | 1.09 | 645,056 | 97.4% |
| 4 | Subword | 0.5603 | 1.475 | 2.44 | 293,705 | 44.0% |
Generated Text Samples (Word-based)
Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model:
Context Size 1:
ٚ سر أ شأر دۊئل ٚ مرکز سال تومامه به اۊ زمت که گرم شاهندشت قلعهأ ۱ ۲۳۶ نفر مردأکان ۰ خانوار ۶۰۵ نفر اعلام بۊگۊده سربس شأرستان ٚ جمعيت أمئن clark ايته جه ايصفهان ٚ اۊستان ٚ جمعيت أ شأر لاریمر ٚ مرکز آمار ٚ
Context Size 2:
ٚ مئن نهأ ؤ آمريکا آمار ٚ مرکز سال ٚ مئن farley ايته جه آمريکا شأران ايسهأ شأر ٚ جمعيت ۸ ۷۱۰ نفر ۲ ۹۰۶ خانوار بۊ عنوان نتایج سرشماری عمومی نفوس وٚ شأرستان آیؤوا شأران en pena pobre puerto rico ايته جه آمريکا شأران ايسه گه نطنز ٚ
Context Size 3:
ٚ مئن نهأ ؤ آمريکا آمار ٚ مرکز أ شأر ٚ جمعيت أ ۳۵۲ نفر اعلام بۊگۊده سربسشأرستان ٚ مئن نهأ ؤ آمريکا آمار ٚ مرکز أ شأر ٚ جمعيت أ نفر اعلام بۊگۊده سربسايته جه آمريکا شأرستانان ايسه گه اينديانا شينه أ شأر بیر ٚ شأرستان ٚ مئن نهأ ؤ آمريکا
Context Size 4:
شأرستان ٚ مئن نهأ ؤ آمريکا آمار ٚ مرکز أ شأر ٚ جمعيت أ ۷۹ نفر اعلام بۊگۊده سربسٚ مئن نهأ ؤ آمريکا آمار ٚ مرکز أ شأر ٚ جمعيت أ ۸۹ نفر اعلام بۊگۊده سربس ٚآمريکا آمار ٚ مرکز سال ٚ مئن أ شأر ٚ جمعيت أ نفر اعلام بۊگۊده سربس ٚ شأرستان اؤکلاهؤما
Generated Text Samples (Subword-based)
Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model:
Context Size 1:
_ته_آم_گهر_ٚ_(معيایکز_بای_نه._(ادن_زوستؤر_زوامیتا
Context Size 2:
ان_(ايسه_ده._سربس_ٚ_مار_ٚ_مئن_گه_گه_ه_کي_شأر_هم_بۊ_ۊ_
Context Size 3:
_شأرستان_ٚ_مرکز،_ساشأرستان_ايته_جه_آمستان_ٚ_مئن_نهأ_ؤ_آم
Context Size 4:
_شأر_ايشماردن_جه_آمستان_ٚ_مئن_نهأ_ؤ_آمران_ٚ_مئن_نهأ_ؤ_آمريک
Key Findings
- Best Predictability: Context-4 (word) with 97.4% predictability
- Branching Factor: Decreases with context size (more deterministic)
- Memory Trade-off: Larger contexts require more storage (293,705 contexts)
- Recommendation: Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation
4. Vocabulary Analysis
Statistics
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Vocabulary Size | 46,285 |
| Total Tokens | 2,415,643 |
| Mean Frequency | 52.19 |
| Median Frequency | 3 |
| Frequency Std Dev | 1903.39 |
Most Common Words
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | ٚ | 304,843 |
| 2 | أ | 119,882 |
| 3 | مئن | 103,681 |
| 4 | شأرستان | 80,615 |
| 5 | شأر | 66,303 |
| 6 | آمريکا | 65,573 |
| 7 | شأران | 63,407 |
| 8 | ايسه | 56,161 |
| 9 | جه | 56,023 |
| 10 | ؤ | 55,643 |
Least Common Words (from vocabulary)
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | سبزان | 2 |
| 2 | بۊلغاران | 2 |
| 3 | استعمارکۊنان | 2 |
| 4 | بامؤييد | 2 |
| 5 | آلفؤنسؤ | 2 |
| 6 | ميناب | 2 |
| 7 | بحرين | 2 |
| 8 | قطيف | 2 |
| 9 | واسکؤ | 2 |
| 10 | گاما | 2 |
Zipf's Law Analysis
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Zipf Coefficient | 1.0546 |
| R² (Goodness of Fit) | 0.992625 |
| Adherence Quality | excellent |
Coverage Analysis
| Top N Words | Coverage |
|---|---|
| Top 100 | 74.1% |
| Top 1,000 | 84.7% |
| Top 5,000 | 91.8% |
| Top 10,000 | 94.8% |
Key Findings
- Zipf Compliance: R²=0.9926 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law
- High Frequency Dominance: Top 100 words cover 74.1% of corpus
- Long Tail: 36,285 words needed for remaining 5.2% 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 | 0.7395 | 0.3894 | N/A | N/A |
| mono_64d | 64 | 0.5770 | 0.3519 | N/A | N/A |
| mono_128d | 128 | 0.2174 | 0.3507 | N/A | N/A |
| aligned_32d | 32 | 0.7395 🏆 | 0.3921 | 0.0080 | 0.0960 |
| aligned_64d | 64 | 0.5770 | 0.3499 | 0.0280 | 0.2120 |
| aligned_128d | 128 | 0.2174 | 0.3609 | 0.0600 | 0.2880 |
Key Findings
- Best Isotropy: aligned_32d with 0.7395 (more uniform distribution)
- Semantic Density: Average pairwise similarity of 0.3658. Lower values indicate better semantic separation.
- Alignment Quality: Aligned models achieve up to 6.0% 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 | 0.010 | Low formulaic 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 |
|---|
Productive Suffixes
| Suffix | Examples |
|---|---|
-ان |
أتابکيان, کوهبنان, دوشمنان |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
ستان |
1.38x | 183 contexts | آستان, دستان, استان |
یران |
1.53x | 48 contexts | هیران, میران, ایران |
وستا |
1.47x | 46 contexts | کوستا, اوستا, روستا |
رستا |
1.36x | 61 contexts | رستاق, پرستان, رستاقˇ |
انان |
1.58x | 29 contexts | سانان, بانان, خانان |
روست |
1.53x | 17 contexts | مروست, روستا, بروستر |
اوست |
1.66x | 13 contexts | اوستا, اوستاد, اوستان |
ۊستا |
1.35x | 23 contexts | اۊستا, رۊستا, گۊستاو |
انوا |
1.63x | 12 contexts | انواع, انوارˇ, خانوار |
ايال |
1.64x | 8 contexts | ايالت, ايالات, ايالته |
رۊست |
1.54x | 9 contexts | رۊستا, رۊستم, برۊستن |
يالت |
1.69x | 7 contexts | ايالت, ايالته, ايالتˇ |
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.
No significant affix co-occurrences detected.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| وایکینگان | وایکینگ-ان |
4.5 | وایکینگ |
| بازيکؤنان | بازيکؤن-ان |
4.5 | بازيکؤن |
| هخامنشيان | هخامنشي-ان |
4.5 | هخامنشي |
| ویراستاران | ویراستار-ان |
4.5 | ویراستار |
| استانداردان | استاندارد-ان |
4.5 | استاندارد |
| کیشاورزان | کیشاورز-ان |
4.5 | کیشاورز |
| انقلابیان | انقلابی-ان |
4.5 | انقلابی |
| خاندنکسان | خاندنکس-ان |
4.5 | خاندنکس |
| دموکراتان | دموکرات-ان |
4.5 | دموکرات |
| دانشجویان | دانشجوی-ان |
4.5 | دانشجوی |
| اؤتريشيان | اؤتريشي-ان |
4.5 | اؤتريشي |
| هونرمندان | هونرمند-ان |
4.5 | هونرمند |
| کامپیوتران | کامپیوتر-ان |
4.5 | کامپیوتر |
| موهاجرتان | موهاجرت-ان |
4.5 | موهاجرت |
| بیمارستانان | بیمارست-ان-ان |
3.0 | بیمارست |
6.6 Linguistic Interpretation
Automated Insight: The language Gilaki shows high morphological productivity. The subword models are significantly more efficient than word models, suggesting a rich system of affixation or compounding.
7. Summary & Recommendations
Production Recommendations
| Component | Recommended | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Tokenizer | 64k BPE | Best compression (3.92x) |
| N-gram | 2-gram | Lowest perplexity (289) |
| 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) × 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.
R² (Coefficient of Determination)
Definition: Measures how well the linear fit explains the frequency-rank relationship. Ranges from 0 to 1.
Intuition: R² near 1.0 means the data closely follows Zipf's law; lower values indicate deviation from expected word frequency patterns.
What to seek: R² > 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},
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
- 🌐 Website: wikilangs.org
- 🤗 Models: huggingface.co/wikilangs
- 📊 Data: wikipedia-monthly
- 👤 Author: Omar Kamali
- 🤝 Sponsor: Featherless AI
Generated by Wikilangs Models Pipeline
Report Date: 2026-01-09 23:47:34



















