|
|
--- |
|
|
language: mzn |
|
|
language_name: Mazanderani |
|
|
language_family: iranian_western |
|
|
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-iranian_western |
|
|
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: 4.106 |
|
|
- name: best_isotropy |
|
|
type: isotropy |
|
|
value: 0.8345 |
|
|
- name: vocabulary_size |
|
|
type: vocab |
|
|
value: 0 |
|
|
generated: 2026-01-10 |
|
|
--- |
|
|
|
|
|
# Mazanderani - Wikilangs Models |
|
|
## Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study |
|
|
|
|
|
This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on **Mazanderani** 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](#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** | 3.411x | 3.42 | 0.3343% | 164,223 | |
|
|
| **16k** | 3.703x | 3.71 | 0.3630% | 151,257 | |
|
|
| **32k** | 3.941x | 3.95 | 0.3863% | 142,131 | |
|
|
| **64k** | 4.106x 🏆 | 4.11 | 0.4024% | 136,417 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Tokenization Examples |
|
|
|
|
|
Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size: |
|
|
|
|
|
**Sample 1:** `۴ میلادی تقویم ره اتا سال هسته که قرن اول میلادی گِدر بییه. دکتهئون بزائهئون ...` |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab | Tokens | Count | |
|
|
|-------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 8k | `▁۴ ▁میلادی ▁تقویم ▁ره ▁اتا ▁سال ▁هسته ▁که ▁قرن ▁اول ... (+13 more)` | 23 | |
|
|
| 16k | `▁۴ ▁میلادی ▁تقویم ▁ره ▁اتا ▁سال ▁هسته ▁که ▁قرن ▁اول ... (+13 more)` | 23 | |
|
|
| 32k | `▁۴ ▁میلادی ▁تقویم ▁ره ▁اتا ▁سال ▁هسته ▁که ▁قرن ▁اول ... (+13 more)` | 23 | |
|
|
| 64k | `▁۴ ▁میلادی ▁تقویم ▁ره ▁اتا ▁سال ▁هسته ▁که ▁قرن ▁اول ... (+13 more)` | 23 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**Sample 2:** `داوید لمایتر اتا خونشکر مردی هسته که بولیوی کشور شنه. دپیته چرخهتو اٮسپانیولی ...` |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab | Tokens | Count | |
|
|
|-------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 8k | `▁دا وید ▁ل مای تر ▁اتا ▁خونش ▁کر ▁مردی ▁هسته ... (+14 more)` | 24 | |
|
|
| 16k | `▁داوید ▁ل مای تر ▁اتا ▁خونش ▁کر ▁مردی ▁هسته ▁که ... (+13 more)` | 23 | |
|
|
| 32k | `▁داوید ▁ل مای تر ▁اتا ▁خونش ▁کر ▁مردی ▁هسته ▁که ... (+13 more)` | 23 | |
|
|
| 64k | `▁داوید ▁ل مای تر ▁اتا ▁خونش ▁کر ▁مردی ▁هسته ▁که ... (+13 more)` | 23 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**Sample 3:** `غلیله اتا شهر نوم هسته که متحده عربی امارات کشور شنه و رأسالخیمه اوستان دله دره...` |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab | Tokens | Count | |
|
|
|-------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 8k | `▁غ لی له ▁اتا ▁شهر ▁نوم ▁هسته ▁که ▁متحده ▁عربی ... (+25 more)` | 35 | |
|
|
| 16k | `▁غ لی له ▁اتا ▁شهر ▁نوم ▁هسته ▁که ▁متحده ▁عربی ... (+21 more)` | 31 | |
|
|
| 32k | `▁غ لی له ▁اتا ▁شهر ▁نوم ▁هسته ▁که ▁متحده ▁عربی ... (+21 more)` | 31 | |
|
|
| 64k | `▁غ لی له ▁اتا ▁شهر ▁نوم ▁هسته ▁که ▁متحده ▁عربی ... (+21 more)` | 31 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Compression:** 64k achieves 4.106x compression |
|
|
- **Lowest UNK Rate:** 8k with 0.3343% 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 | 1,968 | 10.94 | 38,757 | 45.2% | 71.9% | |
|
|
| **2-gram** | Subword | 298 🏆 | 8.22 | 7,046 | 69.1% | 97.1% | |
|
|
| **3-gram** | Word | 2,369 | 11.21 | 52,894 | 41.8% | 71.1% | |
|
|
| **3-gram** | Subword | 1,818 | 10.83 | 48,796 | 36.9% | 76.1% | |
|
|
| **4-gram** | Word | 3,695 | 11.85 | 89,441 | 37.0% | 65.4% | |
|
|
| **4-gram** | Subword | 6,187 | 12.60 | 209,004 | 25.9% | 58.2% | |
|
|
| **5-gram** | Word | 4,502 | 12.14 | 83,447 | 33.5% | 61.7% | |
|
|
| **5-gram** | Subword | 13,144 | 13.68 | 447,722 | 21.0% | 51.1% | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Top 5 N-grams by Size |
|
|
|
|
|
**2-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `هسته که` | 52,733 | |
|
|
| 2 | `دله دره` | 33,946 | |
|
|
| 3 | `نوم هسته` | 28,820 | |
|
|
| 4 | `و ونه` | 28,158 | |
|
|
| 5 | `بییه منابع` | 25,419 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**3-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `نوم هسته که` | 28,021 | |
|
|
| 2 | `نفر بییه منابع` | 22,845 | |
|
|
| 3 | `آمریکای متحده ایالات` | 17,920 | |
|
|
| 4 | `دله دره و` | 16,188 | |
|
|
| 5 | `هسته که آمریکای` | 14,732 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**4-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `که آمریکای متحده ایالات` | 14,707 | |
|
|
| 2 | `آمریکای متحده ایالات دله` | 14,703 | |
|
|
| 3 | `هسته که آمریکای متحده` | 14,699 | |
|
|
| 4 | `متحده ایالات دله دره` | 14,693 | |
|
|
| 5 | `ایالات دله دره و` | 14,693 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**5-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `هسته که آمریکای متحده ایالات` | 14,699 | |
|
|
| 2 | `که آمریکای متحده ایالات دله` | 14,695 | |
|
|
| 3 | `متحده ایالات دله دره و` | 14,692 | |
|
|
| 4 | `آمریکای متحده ایالات دله دره` | 14,692 | |
|
|
| 5 | `که سرشماری گته ونه جمعیت` | 14,689 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**2-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `ه _` | 698,566 | |
|
|
| 2 | `_ ا` | 336,637 | |
|
|
| 3 | `ن _` | 321,772 | |
|
|
| 4 | `ی _` | 310,701 | |
|
|
| 5 | `س ت` | 285,751 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**3-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `_ ا ی` | 146,460 | |
|
|
| 2 | `ه . _` | 142,947 | |
|
|
| 3 | `ش ه ر` | 139,676 | |
|
|
| 4 | `_ ش ه` | 138,829 | |
|
|
| 5 | `_ و _` | 137,717 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**4-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `_ ش ه ر` | 131,690 | |
|
|
| 2 | `ه _ و _` | 104,983 | |
|
|
| 3 | `_ د ل ه` | 104,893 | |
|
|
| 4 | `_ ک ه _` | 101,332 | |
|
|
| 5 | `_ ه س ت` | 98,369 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**5-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `_ د ل ه _` | 96,373 | |
|
|
| 2 | `_ ه س ت ه` | 95,332 | |
|
|
| 3 | `ه س ت ه _` | 75,623 | |
|
|
| 4 | `ه _ ک ه _` | 66,982 | |
|
|
| 5 | `_ و ن ه _` | 65,930 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Perplexity:** 2-gram (subword) with 298 |
|
|
- **Entropy Trend:** Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable) |
|
|
- **Coverage:** Top-1000 patterns cover ~51% 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 | 0.7718 | 1.707 | 5.36 | 136,033 | 22.8% | |
|
|
| **1** | Subword | 1.0095 | 2.013 | 9.26 | 1,969 | 0.0% | |
|
|
| **2** | Word | 0.2322 | 1.175 | 1.56 | 721,647 | 76.8% | |
|
|
| **2** | Subword | 0.8667 | 1.823 | 5.64 | 18,228 | 13.3% | |
|
|
| **3** | Word | 0.0688 | 1.049 | 1.15 | 1,114,822 | 93.1% | |
|
|
| **3** | Subword | 0.7398 | 1.670 | 3.74 | 102,751 | 26.0% | |
|
|
| **4** | Word | 0.0264 🏆 | 1.018 | 1.07 | 1,259,544 | 97.4% | |
|
|
| **4** | Subword | 0.5692 | 1.484 | 2.56 | 383,834 | 43.1% | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Generated Text Samples (Word-based) |
|
|
|
|
|
Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model: |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 1:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `و اینستاگرام درون واقع بَیییه مرکز آمار پورتال منابع باغشاه محمد بن اسحاق نیوتن هسته و` |
|
|
2. `دله دره جمعیت نفر هر اتا سیوا بیّن ایران آمارِ سرشماری گته ونه جمعیت اینتا دهستون` |
|
|
3. `که سرشماری گته ونه جمیعت زیر سه خانوار بییه منابع چشمه پچیک کوشکک هسته و دانشگائون` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 2:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `هسته که برونئی ِکشور بائه کارلا گیلبرتا برونی تدسکی به ایتالیایی firenze تلفظ فیرنتزه اتا از وشون` |
|
|
2. `دله دره جمعیت اینتا روستا قشلاق شرقی دهستون شِنه و اینتی که سرشماری گته ونه جمعیت نفر` |
|
|
3. `نوم هسته که مازرون اوستان میون جمِیهَت مردی نوم و نفر زنی نوم هستنه منابع مردی خونشکرون` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 3:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `نوم هسته که فرانسهِ آلپ ماریتیم دله دره اینتا شهر فروانیه استان دله هسته و این روز دله` |
|
|
2. `نفر بییه منابع شهرستان نیویورک شهر و روستائون en new york city متحده ایالات آمریکا دله اولینبار سه` |
|
|
3. `آمریکای متحده ایالات دله دره و آیووا ایالت شنه این شهر ماریون شهرستان دله کـَته و سال میلادی` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 4:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `که آمریکای متحده ایالات دله دره و کلرادو ایالت شنه این شهر اوکلاند شهرستان دله کـَته و سال میلادی` |
|
|
2. `آمریکای متحده ایالات دله دره و نیویورک ایالت شنه این شهر جانسون شهرستان دله کـَته و سال میلادی اینتی` |
|
|
3. `هسته که آمریکای متحده ایالات دله دره و مونتانا ایالت شنه این شهر بنتون شهرستان دله کـَته و ونه` |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Generated Text Samples (Subword-based) |
|
|
|
|
|
Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model: |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 1:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `_مالهستی_ین_سر_ش` |
|
|
2. `اهسابخوانه،_بع_ب` |
|
|
3. `ه_ش_ت_برس_مل_دلا` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 2:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `ه_و_اینه_سبکوم_هسّ` |
|
|
2. `_ایالاد_ره_سر،_وش` |
|
|
3. `ن_که_آمالت_ایر_گز` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 3:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `_این_زوون_موسیقی_ا` |
|
|
2. `ه._اینتی_۲۳٫۸_کیلو` |
|
|
3. `شهرون_روستان_ملی_ز` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 4:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `_شهرستان_دله_دنیا،_` |
|
|
2. `ه_و_ونه_اتا_آمریکای` |
|
|
3. `_دله_باتنه_کشورون_ف` |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### 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 (383,834 contexts) |
|
|
- **Recommendation:** Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
## 4. Vocabulary Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
### Statistics |
|
|
|
|
|
| Metric | Value | |
|
|
|--------|-------| |
|
|
| Vocabulary Size | 62,931 | |
|
|
| Total Tokens | 3,102,430 | |
|
|
| Mean Frequency | 49.30 | |
|
|
| Median Frequency | 3 | |
|
|
| Frequency Std Dev | 1191.35 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Most Common Words |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Word | Frequency | |
|
|
|------|------|-----------| |
|
|
| 1 | و | 138,138 | |
|
|
| 2 | دله | 104,875 | |
|
|
| 3 | که | 101,499 | |
|
|
| 4 | هسته | 95,318 | |
|
|
| 5 | ونه | 66,160 | |
|
|
| 6 | اتا | 64,796 | |
|
|
| 7 | منابع | 55,354 | |
|
|
| 8 | شهرستان | 53,609 | |
|
|
| 9 | ره | 47,333 | |
|
|
| 10 | سال | 45,951 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Least Common Words (from vocabulary) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Word | Frequency | |
|
|
|------|------|-----------| |
|
|
| 1 | produced | 2 | |
|
|
| 2 | crop | 2 | |
|
|
| 3 | brandy | 2 | |
|
|
| 4 | additive | 2 | |
|
|
| 5 | planted | 2 | |
|
|
| 6 | fuel | 2 | |
|
|
| 7 | stem | 2 | |
|
|
| 8 | blight | 2 | |
|
|
| 9 | helianthi | 2 | |
|
|
| 10 | alternaria | 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Zipf's Law Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
| Metric | Value | |
|
|
|--------|-------| |
|
|
| Zipf Coefficient | 1.1390 | |
|
|
| R² (Goodness of Fit) | 0.998996 | |
|
|
| Adherence Quality | **excellent** | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Coverage Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
| Top N Words | Coverage | |
|
|
|-------------|----------| |
|
|
| Top 100 | 58.1% | |
|
|
| Top 1,000 | 78.3% | |
|
|
| Top 5,000 | 89.1% | |
|
|
| Top 10,000 | 93.0% | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Zipf Compliance:** R²=0.9990 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law |
|
|
- **High Frequency Dominance:** Top 100 words cover 58.1% of corpus |
|
|
- **Long Tail:** 52,931 words needed for remaining 7.0% 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 | 0.8345 🏆 | 0.3161 | N/A | N/A | |
|
|
| **mono_64d** | 64 | 0.7563 | 0.2719 | N/A | N/A | |
|
|
| **mono_128d** | 128 | 0.5078 | 0.2460 | N/A | N/A | |
|
|
| **aligned_32d** | 32 | 0.8345 | 0.3171 | 0.0080 | 0.0520 | |
|
|
| **aligned_64d** | 64 | 0.7563 | 0.2751 | 0.0140 | 0.1060 | |
|
|
| **aligned_128d** | 128 | 0.5078 | 0.2372 | 0.0480 | 0.1780 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Isotropy:** mono_32d with 0.8345 (more uniform distribution) |
|
|
- **Semantic Density:** Average pairwise similarity of 0.2772. Lower values indicate better semantic separation. |
|
|
- **Alignment Quality:** Aligned models achieve up to 4.8% 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 | **0.207** | 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 | |
|
|
|--------|----------| |
|
|
| `-ا` | ایازکندی, اسطورهشناسی, اینرهودن | |
|
|
| `-م` | مملکتون, منچسترر, مونتنگرو | |
|
|
| `-ب` | بقدرت, بدبده, بیبون | |
|
|
| `-ک` | کوریبه, کومِک, کانده | |
|
|
| `-س` | سیدروپولیس, سلستین, سِیمین | |
|
|
| `-د` | دپوشیئن, دزاکور, دِرِسهاکردن | |
|
|
| `-ت` | توله, توربین, تنگدشت | |
|
|
| `-ن` | نوازنده, نهجیر, نِوشتنه | |
|
|
|
|
|
#### Productive Suffixes |
|
|
| Suffix | Examples | |
|
|
|--------|----------| |
|
|
| `-ن` | دپوشیئن, صحرااسفنداران, ِنارنجستان | |
|
|
| `-ی` | وشونهای, ایازکندی, اسطورهشناسی | |
|
|
| `-ا` | آلپرکاتا, چیپوا, قارنسرا | |
|
|
| `-ون` | مملکتون, کنتون, بیبون | |
|
|
| `-ه` | توله, نوازنده, کوریبه | |
|
|
| `-ر` | دزاکور, نهجیر, منچسترر | |
|
|
| `-و` | نووارو, مونتنگرو, مارلبورو | |
|
|
| `-ان` | صحرااسفنداران, ِنارنجستان, روستاییان | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 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 | |
|
|
|------|----------|------------------|----------| |
|
|
| `رستا` | 1.66x | 62 contexts | رستاق, هرستا, پرستار | |
|
|
| `یران` | 1.55x | 72 contexts | هیران, حیران, میران | |
|
|
| `ارنه` | 2.10x | 17 contexts | یارنه, نارنه, خارنه | |
|
|
| `ینتا` | 1.77x | 29 contexts | یینتا, سینتا, هینتا | |
|
|
| `روست` | 1.81x | 25 contexts | پروست, اروست, مروست | |
|
|
| `اوست` | 1.80x | 20 contexts | اوستن, اوستش, اوستا | |
|
|
| `ایال` | 1.88x | 16 contexts | ایالت, پایال, ایالات | |
|
|
| `ومتر` | 2.05x | 10 contexts | سومتر, کلومتر, كیلومتر | |
|
|
| `یالت` | 2.03x | 9 contexts | ایالت, یالتا, ِایالت | |
|
|
| `اتنه` | 1.96x | 9 contexts | گاتنه, باتنه, ناتنه | |
|
|
| `هستو` | 1.74x | 12 contexts | هستون, لهستون, بهستون | |
|
|
| `لومت` | 2.01x | 8 contexts | کالومت, کلومتر, كیلومتر | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 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 | |
|
|
|--------|--------|-----------|----------| |
|
|
| `-ا` | `-ی` | 83 words | اینگلیسی, استارکی | |
|
|
| `-ب` | `-ه` | 61 words | بمونه, بديه | |
|
|
| `-ا` | `-ن` | 59 words | الدن, اسکشن | |
|
|
| `-ب` | `-ن` | 50 words | بشناسن, بونان | |
|
|
| `-م` | `-ی` | 50 words | ماهی, مهرابی | |
|
|
| `-م` | `-ن` | 49 words | مزن, مالئون | |
|
|
| `-ا` | `-ا` | 46 words | امانقلوا, اونیدا | |
|
|
| `-ب` | `-ی` | 44 words | بازخوانی, بیطرفی | |
|
|
| `-د` | `-ن` | 44 words | دیتن, دویین | |
|
|
| `-ک` | `-ا` | 40 words | کلائودیا, کوروما | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 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 | |
|
|
|------|-----------------|------------|------| |
|
|
| فیلسوفهایی | **`فیلسوفه-ای-ی`** | 7.5 | `ای` | |
|
|
| شهرکجفرسون | **`شهرکجفر-س-ون`** | 7.5 | `س` | |
|
|
| زوونشناس | **`زوونش-ن-اس`** | 7.5 | `ن` | |
|
|
| اٮسپانیایی | **`اٮسپانیا-ی-ی`** | 7.5 | `ی` | |
|
|
| کانزاسسیتی | **`کانزاسس-ی-تی`** | 7.5 | `ی` | |
|
|
| پورفئیریو | **`پورفئیر-ی-و`** | 7.5 | `ی` | |
|
|
| دانشجویان | **`دانشجو-ی-ان`** | 7.5 | `ی` | |
|
|
| سرخپوستونی | **`سرخپوست-ون-ی`** | 6.0 | `سرخپوست` | |
|
|
| ماکاپارانا | **`ما-کا-پارانا`** | 6.0 | `پارانا` | |
|
|
| دوخانواری | **`دو-خانوار-ی`** | 6.0 | `خانوار` | |
|
|
| هاکِردِنه | **`هاکِردِن-ه`** | 4.5 | `هاکِردِن` | |
|
|
| والنزوئلا | **`و-ال-نزوئلا`** | 4.5 | `نزوئلا` | |
|
|
| شانزدهمین | **`شانزدهم-ین`** | 4.5 | `شانزدهم` | |
|
|
| جنوبوَری | **`جنوبوَر-ی`** | 4.5 | `جنوبوَر` | |
|
|
| رییسجمهوری | **`رییسجمهور-ی`** | 4.5 | `رییسجمهور` | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 6.6 Linguistic Interpretation |
|
|
|
|
|
> **Automated Insight:** |
|
|
The language Mazanderani 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 (4.11x) | |
|
|
| N-gram | **2-gram** | Lowest perplexity (298) | |
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
- 🌐 Website: [wikilangs.org](https://wikilangs.org) |
|
|
- 🤗 Models: [huggingface.co/wikilangs](https://huggingface.co/wikilangs) |
|
|
- 📊 Data: [wikipedia-monthly](https://huggingface.co/datasets/omarkamali/wikipedia-monthly) |
|
|
- 👤 Author: [Omar Kamali](https://huggingface.co/omarkamali) |
|
|
- 🤝 Sponsor: [Featherless AI](https://featherless.ai) |
|
|
--- |
|
|
*Generated by Wikilangs Models Pipeline* |
|
|
|
|
|
*Report Date: 2026-01-10 14:36:37* |
|
|
|