Macedonian - Wikilangs Models
Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study
This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on Macedonian 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 | 3.702x | 3.70 | 0.0702% | 2,405,262 |
| 16k | 4.123x | 4.12 | 0.0782% | 2,159,772 |
| 32k | 4.494x | 4.49 | 0.0852% | 1,981,404 |
| 64k | 4.780x 🏆 | 4.78 | 0.0906% | 1,862,766 |
Tokenization Examples
Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size:
Sample 1: година во архитектурата содржи некои значајни настани. Настани во архитектурата ...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | ▁година ▁во ▁архитектурата ▁содржи ▁некои ▁значајни ▁настани . ▁настани ▁во ... (+3 more) |
13 |
| 16k | ▁година ▁во ▁архитектурата ▁содржи ▁некои ▁значајни ▁настани . ▁настани ▁во ... (+3 more) |
13 |
| 32k | ▁година ▁во ▁архитектурата ▁содржи ▁некои ▁значајни ▁настани . ▁настани ▁во ... (+3 more) |
13 |
| 64k | ▁година ▁во ▁архитектурата ▁содржи ▁некои ▁значајни ▁настани . ▁настани ▁во ... (+3 more) |
13 |
Sample 2: година во архитектурата содржи некои значајни настани. Настани во архитектурата
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | ▁година ▁во ▁архитектурата ▁содржи ▁некои ▁значајни ▁настани . ▁настани ▁во ... (+1 more) |
11 |
| 16k | ▁година ▁во ▁архитектурата ▁содржи ▁некои ▁значајни ▁настани . ▁настани ▁во ... (+1 more) |
11 |
| 32k | ▁година ▁во ▁архитектурата ▁содржи ▁некои ▁значајни ▁настани . ▁настани ▁во ... (+1 more) |
11 |
| 64k | ▁година ▁во ▁архитектурата ▁содржи ▁некои ▁значајни ▁настани . ▁настани ▁во ... (+1 more) |
11 |
Sample 3: 31 мај — 151-иот ден во годината според грегоријанскиот календар (152-и во прест...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | ▁ 3 1 ▁мај ▁— ▁ 1 5 1 - ... (+33 more) |
43 |
| 16k | ▁ 3 1 ▁мај ▁— ▁ 1 5 1 - ... (+32 more) |
42 |
| 32k | ▁ 3 1 ▁мај ▁— ▁ 1 5 1 - ... (+32 more) |
42 |
| 64k | ▁ 3 1 ▁мај ▁— ▁ 1 5 1 - ... (+32 more) |
42 |
Key Findings
- Best Compression: 64k achieves 4.780x compression
- Lowest UNK Rate: 8k with 0.0702% 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 | 148,118 | 17.18 | 1,246,589 | 7.0% | 19.9% |
| 2-gram | Subword | 310 🏆 | 8.28 | 17,556 | 66.9% | 98.2% |
| 3-gram | Word | 382,752 | 18.55 | 2,398,097 | 4.7% | 17.5% |
| 3-gram | Subword | 2,638 | 11.37 | 153,828 | 27.1% | 68.9% |
| 4-gram | Word | 605,602 | 19.21 | 3,842,232 | 4.8% | 19.7% |
| 4-gram | Subword | 15,114 | 13.88 | 929,390 | 13.0% | 37.7% |
| 5-gram | Word | 281,875 | 18.10 | 2,561,910 | 6.9% | 27.5% |
| 5-gram | Subword | 61,546 | 15.91 | 3,120,609 | 6.8% | 22.4% |
Top 5 N-grams by Size
2-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | во година |
270,904 |
| 2 | да се |
185,526 |
| 3 | може да |
82,758 |
| 4 | исто така |
74,629 |
| 5 | година во |
71,130 |
3-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | од страна на |
47,837 |
| 2 | п н е |
45,911 |
| 3 | за време на |
45,528 |
| 4 | во текот на |
44,568 |
| 5 | може да се |
38,713 |
4-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | г п н е |
26,767 |
| 2 | во текот на и |
13,167 |
| 3 | година од страна на |
13,039 |
| 4 | база на податоци на |
10,253 |
| 5 | е вклучен и во |
10,177 |
5-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | новиот општ каталог на длабоконебесни |
10,166 |
| 2 | општ каталог на длабоконебесни тела |
10,166 |
| 3 | тоа е вклучен и во |
10,165 |
| 4 | е вклучен и во други |
10,165 |
| 5 | вршено од повеќе истражувачи па |
10,165 |
2-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | а _ |
16,220,828 |
| 2 | н а |
9,755,201 |
| 3 | о _ |
8,545,001 |
| 4 | и _ |
8,299,189 |
| 5 | _ н |
7,088,266 |
3-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | н а _ |
5,782,550 |
| 2 | _ н а |
5,471,722 |
| 3 | _ в о |
2,895,397 |
| 4 | в о _ |
2,774,290 |
| 5 | а т а |
2,545,500 |
4-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | _ н а _ |
3,968,376 |
| 2 | _ в о _ |
2,496,500 |
| 3 | а т а _ |
2,159,054 |
| 4 | и т е _ |
1,510,803 |
| 5 | _ о д _ |
1,503,838 |
5-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | а _ н а _ |
1,123,156 |
| 2 | _ г о д и |
801,639 |
| 3 | г о д и н |
793,128 |
| 4 | о д и н а |
717,809 |
| 5 | а _ в о _ |
641,767 |
Key Findings
- Best Perplexity: 2-gram (subword) with 310
- Entropy Trend: Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable)
- Coverage: Top-1000 patterns cover ~22% 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 | 0.9313 | 1.907 | 11.18 | 1,397,869 | 6.9% |
| 1 | Subword | 0.9537 | 1.937 | 6.98 | 8,643 | 4.6% |
| 2 | Word | 0.3725 | 1.295 | 2.41 | 15,610,954 | 62.7% |
| 2 | Subword | 0.7745 | 1.711 | 5.49 | 60,305 | 22.6% |
| 3 | Word | 0.1516 | 1.111 | 1.34 | 37,555,740 | 84.8% |
| 3 | Subword | 0.8197 | 1.765 | 4.77 | 330,722 | 18.0% |
| 4 | Word | 0.0598 🏆 | 1.042 | 1.11 | 50,433,239 | 94.0% |
| 4 | Subword | 0.7470 | 1.678 | 3.67 | 1,576,045 | 25.3% |
Generated Text Samples (Word-based)
Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model:
Context Size 1:
на минотаурот најстарото болничко лекување на електронот може да го ставаат во ноември се од овиево г п н е независна држава за аварите да се случиле неколку минути по неколкуи надгледувајќи радикални реакции како и главен увозник skycom сад и во романија историјата како ugc
Context Size 2:
во година во полска и украина реката е 117 км2 дитмаршен 132 965 1 861 година предда се натпреварува водачи на земјата развојот на препарати за атрофичната кожа многу поширок опфат т...може да има изразени оддавања на стронциум и алуминиум изопрооксиди соодветно првиот е анонимното ск...
Context Size 3:
од страна на данците кои се подолги од аксијалната пиридилна ga n врска со должини на страните аза време на вечерата иван илич е веќе многу пијан кога линдорф влегува со пејачката стела и гово текот на 367 и 368 исламска година настани 1 јануари ссср започнува со својата хуманитарна активн...
Context Size 4:
г п н е според продолжениот јулијански календар истата трае во текот на и година според асирскиот ка...во текот на и година според асирскиот календар во којшто мерењето на времето започнува со 622 година...година од страна на бугарските истражувачи генеричките лекови го формираат столбот на локалната екон...
Generated Text Samples (Subword-based)
Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model:
Context Size 1:
_о_зна_скан_идо_а._во_и_нина_н_сова_дичеме_на_ка
Context Size 2:
а_изенизвине_на_мна_доне_перетски_о_улигна_арларист
Context Size 3:
на_јанско-лисковек_на_ост_попрата_же_во_френ_каквиот_п
Context Size 4:
_на_чашките_заливор_во_сличн_кривале_дата_долна_свињарски
Key Findings
- Best Predictability: Context-4 (word) with 94.0% predictability
- Branching Factor: Decreases with context size (more deterministic)
- Memory Trade-off: Larger contexts require more storage (1,576,045 contexts)
- Recommendation: Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation
4. Vocabulary Analysis
Statistics
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Vocabulary Size | 629,840 |
| Total Tokens | 66,539,192 |
| Mean Frequency | 105.64 |
| Median Frequency | 4 |
| Frequency Std Dev | 7439.52 |
Most Common Words
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | на | 3,984,194 |
| 2 | во | 2,517,366 |
| 3 | и | 2,001,305 |
| 4 | од | 1,514,717 |
| 5 | се | 1,235,287 |
| 6 | за | 987,031 |
| 7 | со | 823,175 |
| 8 | е | 782,070 |
| 9 | година | 672,383 |
| 10 | да | 610,844 |
Least Common Words (from vocabulary)
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | калеуче | 2 |
| 2 | chiloé | 2 |
| 3 | преживениот | 2 |
| 4 | делевиш | 2 |
| 5 | platessoides | 2 |
| 6 | pleco | 2 |
| 7 | метарма | 2 |
| 8 | алалаона | 2 |
| 9 | octodecimguttata | 2 |
| 10 | домбасл | 2 |
Zipf's Law Analysis
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Zipf Coefficient | 0.9604 |
| R² (Goodness of Fit) | 0.996757 |
| Adherence Quality | excellent |
Coverage Analysis
| Top N Words | Coverage |
|---|---|
| Top 100 | 37.1% |
| Top 1,000 | 56.3% |
| Top 5,000 | 72.8% |
| Top 10,000 | 79.8% |
Key Findings
- Zipf Compliance: R²=0.9968 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law
- High Frequency Dominance: Top 100 words cover 37.1% of corpus
- Long Tail: 619,840 words needed for remaining 20.2% 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 | 0.7374 | 0.3633 | N/A | N/A |
| mono_64d | 64 | 0.7024 | 0.2990 | N/A | N/A |
| mono_128d | 128 | 0.6203 | 0.2691 | N/A | N/A |
| aligned_32d | 32 | 0.7374 🏆 | 0.3635 | 0.1520 | 0.5340 |
| aligned_64d | 64 | 0.7024 | 0.2953 | 0.2380 | 0.6560 |
| aligned_128d | 128 | 0.6203 | 0.2655 | 0.3760 | 0.7180 |
Key Findings
- Best Isotropy: aligned_32d with 0.7374 (more uniform distribution)
- Semantic Density: Average pairwise similarity of 0.3093. Lower values indicate better semantic separation.
- Alignment Quality: Aligned models achieve up to 37.6% 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 | 0.225 | 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 |
|---|---|
-с |
стенливил, североисточен, салминен |
-ка |
кантрел, кач, католски |
-а |
аргас, азилантите, акнисте |
-ма |
мамуци, мажените, маринадата |
-по |
помориска, подјазичната, положат |
-к |
кантрел, кладошница, коинон |
-ко |
коинон, кошланд, копродукт |
-s |
sbordone, superluminal, stralsunder |
Productive Suffixes
| Suffix | Examples |
|---|---|
-а |
душевина, електроника, пијаната |
-и |
издатоци, рудници, гликобелковини |
-е |
најневообичаените, субкултурните, царице |
-те |
најневообичаените, субкултурните, регистраторите |
-та |
пијаната, проверката, подјазичната |
-т |
еукариот, реверсот, меѓупарламентарниот |
-от |
еукариот, реверсот, меѓупарламентарниот |
-о |
витешкото, интимно, пароло |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
уваа |
2.43x | 85 contexts | уваат, чуваа, жуваат |
увањ |
2.04x | 160 contexts | лување, рување, чување |
увал |
2.00x | 172 contexts | увала, јувал, дувал |
ијат |
1.76x | 300 contexts | лијат, хијат, ријат |
ички |
1.82x | 235 contexts | кички, нички, лички |
кедо |
2.77x | 33 contexts | македо, алкедо, македон |
ањет |
2.27x | 71 contexts | рањето, вањето, кањете |
нски |
1.58x | 402 contexts | ронски, менски, ренски |
анск |
1.34x | 935 contexts | канск, анска, данск |
иски |
1.56x | 353 contexts | киски, тиски, писки |
инск |
1.39x | 722 contexts | пинск, инско, минск |
онск |
1.41x | 510 contexts | ронски, јонско, шонски |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
-п |
-а |
118 words | пресбикуза, пентесилеја |
-с |
-а |
108 words | самбра, скаса |
-п |
-и |
79 words | повелбени, пољани |
-п |
-е |
76 words | питите, поиде |
-к |
-а |
74 words | клитика, куиксама |
-с |
-и |
70 words | сукотаи, сапрофитии |
-с |
-е |
67 words | служите, софите |
-по |
-а |
66 words | поситна, почесна |
-а |
-а |
64 words | адарсана, аеторема |
-б |
-а |
62 words | безлисна, бозонската |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| клинетите | клинет-и-те |
7.5 | и |
| карантанците | карантанц-и-те |
7.5 | и |
| ҫемҫелӗхпалли | ҫемҫелӗхпал-л-и |
7.5 | л |
| кедровата | кедров-а-та |
7.5 | а |
| тркачката | тркач-ка-та |
7.5 | ка |
| пантотенат | пантотен-а-т |
7.5 | а |
| наранџито | наранџ-и-то |
7.5 | и |
| епросартан | епросар-та-н |
7.5 | та |
| стивенсовиот | стивенсов-и-от |
7.5 | и |
| организирано | организир-а-но |
7.5 | а |
| евроазијците | евроазијц-и-те |
7.5 | и |
| епистазата | епистаз-а-та |
7.5 | а |
| страдачите | страдач-и-те |
7.5 | и |
| поштарината | поштарин-а-та |
7.5 | а |
| дебатирано | дебатир-а-но |
7.5 | а |
6.6 Linguistic Interpretation
Automated Insight: The language Macedonian 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 (4.78x) |
| N-gram | 2-gram | Lowest perplexity (310) |
| Markov | Context-4 | Highest predictability (94.0%) |
| 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) × 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: 2026-01-10 18:37:02



















