Ido - Wikilangs Models
Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study
This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on Ido 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, 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 | 3.502x | 3.50 | 0.1398% | 1,043,846 |
| 16k | 3.779x | 3.78 | 0.1508% | 967,447 |
| 32k | 4.003x | 4.00 | 0.1597% | 913,354 |
| 64k | 4.198x π | 4.20 | 0.1675% | 870,791 |
Tokenization Examples
Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size:
Sample 1: Surabaya esas urbo en Indonezia. Segun statistiki dil yaro ol havis habitanti. L...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | βsu ra ba ya βesas βurbo βen βindonezia . βsegun ... (+22 more) |
32 |
| 16k | βsura ba ya βesas βurbo βen βindonezia . βsegun βstatistiki ... (+21 more) |
31 |
| 32k | βsura ba ya βesas βurbo βen βindonezia . βsegun βstatistiki ... (+21 more) |
31 |
| 64k | βsura baya βesas βurbo βen βindonezia . βsegun βstatistiki βdil ... (+20 more) |
30 |
Sample 2: Alessandro Algardi (n. ye la 27ma di novembro til la 10ma di junio esis Italiana...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | βal es sand ro βalgar di β( n . βye ... (+25 more) |
35 |
| 16k | βalessandro βalgar di β( n . βye βla β 2 ... (+20 more) |
30 |
| 32k | βalessandro βalgar di β( n . βye βla β 2 ... (+20 more) |
30 |
| 64k | βalessandro βalgardi β( n . βye βla β 2 7 ... (+19 more) |
29 |
Sample 3: 127 aK <--> 125 aK / 2ma yarcento aK Eventi Naski Morti Demetrius 2ma, rejo di S...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | β 1 2 7 βak β<--> β 1 2 5 ... (+26 more) |
36 |
| 16k | β 1 2 7 βak β<--> β 1 2 5 ... (+26 more) |
36 |
| 32k | β 1 2 7 βak β<--> β 1 2 5 ... (+24 more) |
34 |
| 64k | β 1 2 7 βak β<--> β 1 2 5 ... (+22 more) |
32 |
Key Findings
- Best Compression: 64k achieves 4.198x compression
- Lowest UNK Rate: 8k with 0.1398% 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 | 6,638 | 12.70 | 110,517 | 24.1% | 59.4% |
| 2-gram | Subword | 268 π | 8.07 | 6,097 | 67.9% | 99.3% |
| 3-gram | Word | 11,261 | 13.46 | 195,686 | 21.4% | 52.5% |
| 3-gram | Subword | 1,922 | 10.91 | 41,403 | 28.8% | 75.7% |
| 4-gram | Word | 22,731 | 14.47 | 409,855 | 19.3% | 45.9% |
| 4-gram | Subword | 8,112 | 12.99 | 211,688 | 16.0% | 50.4% |
| 5-gram | Word | 26,396 | 14.69 | 378,626 | 19.1% | 42.8% |
| 5-gram | Subword | 22,092 | 14.43 | 608,475 | 11.3% | 38.7% |
Top 5 N-grams by Size
2-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | la mezvalora |
36,791 |
| 2 | en la |
36,605 |
| 3 | de la |
33,305 |
| 4 | o pluse |
25,103 |
| 5 | yari o |
24,921 |
3-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | yari o pluse |
24,876 |
| 2 | 65 yari o |
18,786 |
| 3 | min kam 18 |
18,694 |
| 4 | kam 18 yari |
18,691 |
| 5 | la mezvalora revenuo |
18,348 |
4-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 65 yari o pluse |
18,782 |
| 2 | min kam 18 yari |
18,690 |
| 3 | evante min kam 18 |
18,058 |
| 4 | evante 65 yari o |
17,999 |
| 5 | la demografiala kontado di |
13,448 |
5-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | evante min kam 18 yari |
18,055 |
| 2 | evante 65 yari o pluse |
17,995 |
| 3 | segun la demografiala kontado di |
13,417 |
| 4 | vivis sub la povreso lineo |
11,202 |
| 5 | esas plene lektebla en ido |
11,081 |
2-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | a _ |
1,248,693 |
| 2 | o _ |
1,110,924 |
| 3 | _ e |
871,258 |
| 4 | _ d |
779,897 |
| 5 | l a |
719,367 |
3-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | l a _ |
510,264 |
| 2 | _ d i |
407,611 |
| 3 | _ l a |
400,860 |
| 4 | i s _ |
310,545 |
| 5 | _ e s |
287,503 |
4-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | _ l a _ |
353,604 |
| 2 | _ d i _ |
277,290 |
| 3 | o _ d i |
199,478 |
| 4 | _ e n _ |
177,757 |
| 5 | e s i s |
177,202 |
5-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | e s i s _ |
168,704 |
| 2 | o _ d i _ |
160,395 |
| 3 | _ e s i s |
149,207 |
| 4 | e s a s _ |
121,319 |
| 5 | _ e s a s |
107,177 |
Key Findings
- Best Perplexity: 2-gram (subword) with 268
- Entropy Trend: Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable)
- Coverage: Top-1000 patterns cover ~39% 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 | 0.9058 | 1.874 | 7.11 | 203,018 | 9.4% |
| 1 | Subword | 0.8797 | 1.840 | 6.18 | 2,897 | 12.0% |
| 2 | Word | 0.3104 | 1.240 | 1.87 | 1,423,283 | 69.0% |
| 2 | Subword | 0.8077 | 1.750 | 4.92 | 17,895 | 19.2% |
| 3 | Word | 0.1238 | 1.090 | 1.27 | 2,624,412 | 87.6% |
| 3 | Subword | 0.7203 | 1.648 | 3.90 | 88,062 | 28.0% |
| 4 | Word | 0.0636 π | 1.045 | 1.13 | 3,294,506 | 93.6% |
| 4 | Subword | 0.6809 | 1.603 | 3.13 | 342,746 | 31.9% |
Generated Text Samples (Word-based)
Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model:
Context Size 1:
la urbo amontis a polonia e polona linguo esas turkiana distrikto sieradz komono sideyo koΕskowola 6di iulius caesar vetero pos la demografiala kontado di qui rezidis en provinco biaΕystok e toe kinadek e resursi nome illinois usa segun la mezvalora evo esis dum la 28ma di
Context Size 2:
la mezvalora revenuo po familio esis 3 01 personi la procento di habitanti segun evo esis 18en la montari serra do mar e zapolyarni referi distrikto yamal nenec e republiko komi denisovka vila...de la prezidanto di peru n jΓ³zef cyrankiewicz chefministro di japonia n chadwick boseman usan aktoro...
Context Size 3:
yari o pluse esis 102 5 viri la mezvalora revenuo po familio esis 38 750 kontre 26 25065 yari o pluse qua vivis sole la mezvalora grandeso po hemanaro esis 2 80 personi e lamin kam 18 yari 7 9 de 18 til 24 yari 27 9 de 25 til 44 yari
Context Size 4:
65 yari o pluse la mezvalora evo esis 29 yari po singla 100 mulieri esis 90 9 viri pomin kam 18 yari 7 6 de 18 til 24 yari 30 7 de 25 til 44 yari 20evante min kam 18 yari en la domo 41 4 esis mariajita e habitis kune en 18 5 muliero
Generated Text Samples (Subword-based)
Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model:
Context Size 1:
_e_mbi_e_eri_vikadi,_mepha_lamiaitam_adiestrista
Context Size 2:
a_sen_8_yaro_estro_pozukto_(n._cia_esis_milietri._c
Context Size 3:
la_di_ventora_graf_dil_24_yarmin_kam_la_un_l'ado_e_la_
Context Size 4:
_la_denseso_portuo__di_esis_hemanaro_oo_di_interko_di_rus
Key Findings
- Best Predictability: Context-4 (word) with 93.6% predictability
- Branching Factor: Decreases with context size (more deterministic)
- Memory Trade-off: Larger contexts require more storage (342,746 contexts)
- Recommendation: Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation
4. Vocabulary Analysis
Statistics
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Vocabulary Size | 101,186 |
| Total Tokens | 7,375,821 |
| Mean Frequency | 72.89 |
| Median Frequency | 4 |
| Frequency Std Dev | 2039.44 |
Most Common Words
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | la | 358,980 |
| 2 | di | 277,525 |
| 3 | e | 204,731 |
| 4 | en | 181,179 |
| 5 | de | 158,269 |
| 6 | esis | 149,214 |
| 7 | esas | 107,376 |
| 8 | yari | 80,594 |
| 9 | 0 | 61,043 |
| 10 | dil | 50,131 |
Least Common Words (from vocabulary)
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | fekala | 2 |
| 2 | 24h | 2 |
| 3 | pisuisse | 2 |
| 4 | gilliams | 2 |
| 5 | stokely | 2 |
| 6 | arΔentisto | 2 |
| 7 | servisoj | 2 |
| 8 | kandelingi | 2 |
| 9 | aplicata | 2 |
| 10 | tarcisius | 2 |
Zipf's Law Analysis
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Zipf Coefficient | 1.2179 |
| RΒ² (Goodness of Fit) | 0.996161 |
| Adherence Quality | excellent |
Coverage Analysis
| Top N Words | Coverage |
|---|---|
| Top 100 | 50.8% |
| Top 1,000 | 78.9% |
| Top 5,000 | 88.8% |
| Top 10,000 | 92.4% |
Key Findings
- Zipf Compliance: RΒ²=0.9962 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law
- High Frequency Dominance: Top 100 words cover 50.8% of corpus
- Long Tail: 91,186 words needed for remaining 7.6% 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 | 0.7983 | 0.3307 | N/A | N/A |
| mono_64d | 64 | 0.7791 | 0.2594 | N/A | N/A |
| mono_128d | 128 | 0.7299 | 0.2100 | N/A | N/A |
| aligned_32d | 32 | 0.7983 π | 0.3377 | 0.1260 | 0.5080 |
| aligned_64d | 64 | 0.7791 | 0.2656 | 0.2460 | 0.6360 |
| aligned_128d | 128 | 0.7299 | 0.2168 | 0.2800 | 0.6480 |
Key Findings
- Best Isotropy: aligned_32d with 0.7983 (more uniform distribution)
- Semantic Density: Average pairwise similarity of 0.2700. Lower values indicate better semantic separation.
- Alignment Quality: Aligned models achieve up to 28.0% 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 | 0.105 | 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 |
|---|---|
-s |
stolbova, skripta, sΙsΛnufka |
-a |
arnhim, avioni, adlard |
-k |
klozado, kano, kalm |
-ma |
makedonian, maher, macbride |
-b |
bret, beggars, bombard |
-m |
mineirΓ£o, mobilizita, millΓ‘n |
-p |
pontono, probez, pirat |
-t |
turkian, templego, très |
Productive Suffixes
| Suffix | Examples |
|---|---|
-a |
mobilizita, neseparebla, stolbova |
-o |
editero, pontono, mineirΓ£o |
-i |
cieli, enskriburi, slobodskoi |
-s |
ramis, beggars, efstratios |
-e |
opolskie, macbride, impe |
-n |
millΓ‘n, turkian, makedonian |
-ta |
mobilizita, skripta, dicinta |
-ra |
letra, teklinowopropra, mieczkipropra |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
vant |
1.93x | 47 contexts | vanto, avant, levant |
olon |
1.90x | 45 contexts | solon, polon, rolon |
trik |
1.97x | 36 contexts | triki, striki, striko |
abit |
2.17x | 23 contexts | habiti, habito, abitov |
istr |
1.76x | 49 contexts | istra, istro, istros |
kont |
1.74x | 48 contexts | kontr, konto, konti |
metr |
1.85x | 32 contexts | metro, metri, metra |
itan |
1.46x | 82 contexts | eitan, titan, titano |
rovi |
1.77x | 34 contexts | rovin, trovis, provis |
habi |
2.02x | 18 contexts | habis, habib, dhabi |
ovin |
1.84x | 23 contexts | rovin, lovin, bovino |
omet |
1.76x | 26 contexts | comet, domett, dometo |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
-s |
-a |
143 words | senoia, senforma |
-k |
-a |
138 words | kalorizita, kruΛlΙfska |
-k |
-o |
127 words | kaloro, kreinto |
-p |
-o |
121 words | pleanto, poniardago |
-p |
-a |
119 words | prishtina, progresema |
-a |
-o |
113 words | anulo, arbusto |
-a |
-a |
101 words | andrΓ©a, australa |
-s |
-o |
88 words | sanatorio, sproso |
-d |
-a |
82 words | dekesisesma, dalayna |
-p |
-s |
76 words | pezas, pleasures |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| davisboro | davisb-o-ro |
7.5 | o |
| personaro | person-a-ro |
7.5 | a |
| kompozado | kompoz-a-do |
7.5 | a |
| dinastiala | dinasti-a-la |
7.5 | a |
| militaral | milit-ar-al |
7.5 | ar |
| billboard | billbo-ar-d |
7.5 | ar |
| singulara | singu-la-ra |
7.5 | la |
| senmariajita | se-n-mariajita |
7.5 | mariajita |
| exercesis | exerce-s-is |
7.5 | s |
| grafikala | grafi-ka-la |
7.5 | ka |
| provincial | provinc-i-al |
7.5 | i |
| companheiro | companhe-i-ro |
7.5 | i |
| landskrona | landskr-o-na |
7.5 | o |
| konskriptis | ko-n-skriptis |
7.5 | skriptis |
| chanjesis | chanje-s-is |
7.5 | s |
6.6 Linguistic Interpretation
Automated Insight: The language Ido 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 (4.20x) |
| N-gram | 2-gram | Lowest perplexity (268) |
| Markov | Context-4 | Highest predictability (93.6%) |
| 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},
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
- π Website: wikilangs.org
- π€ Models: huggingface.co/wikilangs
- π Data: wikipedia-monthly
- π€ Author: Omar Kamali
- π€ Sponsor: Featherless AI
Generated by Wikilangs Models Pipeline
Report Date: 2026-01-10 04:52:07



















