|
|
--- |
|
|
language: pa |
|
|
language_name: Punjabi |
|
|
language_family: indoaryan_central |
|
|
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-indoaryan_central |
|
|
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: 4.042 |
|
|
- name: best_isotropy |
|
|
type: isotropy |
|
|
value: 0.8342 |
|
|
- name: vocabulary_size |
|
|
type: vocab |
|
|
value: 0 |
|
|
generated: 2026-01-10 |
|
|
--- |
|
|
|
|
|
# Punjabi - Wikilangs Models |
|
|
## Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study |
|
|
|
|
|
This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on **Punjabi** Wikipedia data. |
|
|
We analyze tokenizers, n-gram models, Markov chains, vocabulary statistics, and word embeddings. |
|
|
|
|
|
## ๐ Repository Contents |
|
|
|
|
|
### Models & Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
- Tokenizers (8k, 16k, 32k, 64k) |
|
|
- N-gram models (2, 3, 4, 5-gram) |
|
|
- Markov chains (context of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5) |
|
|
- Subword N-gram and Markov chains |
|
|
- Embeddings in various sizes and dimensions (aligned and unaligned) |
|
|
- Language Vocabulary |
|
|
- Language Statistics |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
### Analysis and Evaluation |
|
|
|
|
|
- [1. Tokenizer Evaluation](#1-tokenizer-evaluation) |
|
|
- [2. N-gram Model Evaluation](#2-n-gram-model-evaluation) |
|
|
- [3. Markov Chain Evaluation](#3-markov-chain-evaluation) |
|
|
- [4. Vocabulary Analysis](#4-vocabulary-analysis) |
|
|
- [5. Word Embeddings Evaluation](#5-word-embeddings-evaluation) |
|
|
- [6. Morphological Analysis (Experimental)](#6--morphological-analysis-experimental) |
|
|
- [7. Summary & Recommendations](#7-summary--recommendations) |
|
|
- [Metrics Glossary](#appendix-metrics-glossary--interpretation-guide) |
|
|
- [Visualizations Index](#visualizations-index) |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
## 1. Tokenizer Evaluation |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
### Results |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab Size | Compression | Avg Token Len | UNK Rate | Total Tokens | |
|
|
|------------|-------------|---------------|----------|--------------| |
|
|
| **8k** | 3.344x | 3.35 | 0.0292% | 637,303 | |
|
|
| **16k** | 3.646x | 3.65 | 0.0318% | 584,610 | |
|
|
| **32k** | 3.881x | 3.88 | 0.0339% | 549,074 | |
|
|
| **64k** | 4.042x ๐ | 4.04 | 0.0353% | 527,239 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Tokenization Examples |
|
|
|
|
|
Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size: |
|
|
|
|
|
**Sample 1:** `เจเจธเฉเฉฐเจฌเฉเฉ เจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ เจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ เจฆเฉ เจซเจผเจคเจนเจฟเจเฉเฉเจน เจธเจพเจนเจฟเจฌ เจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ เจฆเฉ เจเฉเฉเจพ เจฌเจฒเจพเจ เจฆเจพ เจเฉฑเจ เจชเจฟเฉฐเจก เจนเฉเฅค เจนเจตเจพเจฒ...` |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab | Tokens | Count | |
|
|
|-------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 8k | `โเจเจธ เฉเฉฐ เจฌ เฉเฉ โเจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ โเจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ โเจฆเฉ โเจซเจผเจคเจนเจฟเจเฉเฉเจน โเจธเจพเจนเจฟเจฌ โเจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ ... (+13 more)` | 23 | |
|
|
| 16k | `โเจเจธ เฉเฉฐ เจฌเฉเฉ โเจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ โเจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ โเจฆเฉ โเจซเจผเจคเจนเจฟเจเฉเฉเจน โเจธเจพเจนเจฟเจฌ โเจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ โเจฆเฉ ... (+12 more)` | 22 | |
|
|
| 32k | `โเจเจธ เฉเฉฐ เจฌเฉเฉ โเจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ โเจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ โเจฆเฉ โเจซเจผเจคเจนเจฟเจเฉเฉเจน โเจธเจพเจนเจฟเจฌ โเจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ โเจฆเฉ ... (+12 more)` | 22 | |
|
|
| 64k | `โเจเจธ เฉเฉฐ เจฌเฉเฉ โเจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ โเจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ โเจฆเฉ โเจซเจผเจคเจนเจฟเจเฉเฉเจน โเจธเจพเจนเจฟเจฌ โเจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ โเจฆเฉ ... (+12 more)` | 22 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**Sample 2:** `เจเฉเฉฐเจ เจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ เจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ เจฆเฉ เจคเจฐเจจเจคเจพเจฐเจจ เจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ เจฆเฉ เจฌเจฒเจพเจ เจญเจฟเฉฑเจเฉเจตเจฟเฉฐเจก เจฆเจพ เจเฉฑเจ เจชเจฟเฉฐเจก เจนเฉเฅค เจนเจตเจพเจฒเฉ เจคเจพเจฐเจจ...` |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab | Tokens | Count | |
|
|
|-------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 8k | `โเจ เฉเฉฐ เจ โเจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ โเจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ โเจฆเฉ โเจคเจฐเจจเจคเจพเจฐเจจ โเจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ โเจฆเฉ โเจฌเจฒเจพเจ ... (+15 more)` | 25 | |
|
|
| 16k | `โเจ เฉเฉฐ เจ โเจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ โเจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ โเจฆเฉ โเจคเจฐเจจเจคเจพเจฐเจจ โเจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ โเจฆเฉ โเจฌเจฒเจพเจ ... (+13 more)` | 23 | |
|
|
| 32k | `โเจ เฉเฉฐเจ โเจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ โเจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ โเจฆเฉ โเจคเจฐเจจเจคเจพเจฐเจจ โเจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ โเจฆเฉ โเจฌเจฒเจพเจ โเจญเจฟเฉฑ ... (+12 more)` | 22 | |
|
|
| 64k | `โเจเฉเฉฐเจ โเจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ โเจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ โเจฆเฉ โเจคเจฐเจจเจคเจพเจฐเจจ โเจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ โเจฆเฉ โเจฌเจฒเจพเจ โเจญเจฟเฉฑเจเฉเจตเจฟเฉฐเจก โเจฆเจพ ... (+9 more)` | 19 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**Sample 3:** `เจญเฉเจฒ เจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ เจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ เจฆเฉ เจเจฒเฉฐเจงเจฐ เจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ เจฆเฉ เจฌเจฒเจพเจ เจเจฆเจฎเจชเฉเจฐ เจฆเจพ เจเฉฑเจ เจชเจฟเฉฐเจก เจนเฉเฅค เจนเจตเจพเจฒเฉ เจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ เจฆเฉ...` |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab | Tokens | Count | |
|
|
|-------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 8k | `โเจญ เฉเจฒ โเจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ โเจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ โเจฆเฉ โเจเจฒเฉฐเจงเจฐ โเจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ โเจฆเฉ โเจฌเจฒเจพเจ โเจเจฆ ... (+10 more)` | 20 | |
|
|
| 16k | `โเจญ เฉเจฒ โเจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ โเจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ โเจฆเฉ โเจเจฒเฉฐเจงเจฐ โเจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ โเจฆเฉ โเจฌเจฒเจพเจ โเจเจฆเจฎเจชเฉเจฐ ... (+9 more)` | 19 | |
|
|
| 32k | `โเจญ เฉเจฒ โเจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ โเจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ โเจฆเฉ โเจเจฒเฉฐเจงเจฐ โเจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ โเจฆเฉ โเจฌเจฒเจพเจ โเจเจฆเจฎเจชเฉเจฐ ... (+9 more)` | 19 | |
|
|
| 64k | `โเจญเฉเจฒ โเจญเจพเจฐเจคเฉ โเจชเฉฐเจเจพเจฌ โเจฆเฉ โเจเจฒเฉฐเจงเจฐ โเจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ โเจฆเฉ โเจฌเจฒเจพเจ โเจเจฆเจฎเจชเฉเจฐ โเจฆเจพ ... (+8 more)` | 18 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Compression:** 64k achieves 4.042x compression |
|
|
- **Lowest UNK Rate:** 8k with 0.0292% 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 | 65,512 | 16.00 | 395,139 | 9.9% | 25.1% | |
|
|
| **2-gram** | Subword | 1,824 ๐ | 10.83 | 65,167 | 38.3% | 74.2% | |
|
|
| **3-gram** | Word | 226,610 | 17.79 | 723,559 | 4.6% | 13.1% | |
|
|
| **3-gram** | Subword | 17,627 | 14.11 | 426,051 | 16.0% | 37.7% | |
|
|
| **4-gram** | Word | 595,990 | 19.18 | 1,217,646 | 2.1% | 7.1% | |
|
|
| **4-gram** | Subword | 101,454 | 16.63 | 1,977,133 | 8.3% | 22.6% | |
|
|
| **5-gram** | Word | 481,395 | 18.88 | 795,359 | 2.0% | 6.8% | |
|
|
| **5-gram** | Subword | 336,559 | 18.36 | 3,786,103 | 4.3% | 14.4% | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Top 5 N-grams by Size |
|
|
|
|
|
**2-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `เจเจพเจเจฆเจพ เจนเฉ` | 51,096 | |
|
|
| 2 | `เจเจฟเจ เจธเฉ` | 36,408 | |
|
|
| 3 | `เจคเฉเจฐ เจคเฉ` | 36,131 | |
|
|
| 4 | `เจนเฉ เจ
เจคเฉ` | 35,656 | |
|
|
| 5 | `เจเฉเจคเจพ เจเจฟเจ` | 30,014 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**3-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `เจเฉเจคเจพ เจเจฟเจ เจธเฉ` | 16,375 | |
|
|
| 2 | `เจฆเฉ เจฐเฉเจช เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ` | 11,064 | |
|
|
| 3 | `เจเจฟเจนเจพ เจเจพเจเจฆเจพ เจนเฉ` | 9,910 | |
|
|
| 4 | `เจฆเฉ เจคเฉเจฐ เจคเฉ` | 7,251 | |
|
|
| 5 | `เจเจฎ เจคเฉเจฐ เจคเฉ` | 7,156 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**4-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `เจธเจพเจฒ เจฆเฉ เจเจฎเจฐ เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ` | 4,687 | |
|
|
| 2 | `เจฆเจพ เจเฉฑเจ เจชเจฟเฉฐเจก เจนเฉ` | 4,498 | |
|
|
| 3 | `เจนเจตเจพเจฒเฉ เจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ เจฆเฉ เจชเจฟเฉฐเจก` | 3,112 | |
|
|
| 4 | `เจตเฉ เจเจฟเจนเจพ เจเจพเจเจฆเจพ เจนเฉ` | 2,917 | |
|
|
| 5 | `เจนเฉ เจนเจตเจพเจฒเฉ เจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ เจฆเฉ` | 2,408 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**5-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `เจนเฉ เจนเจตเจพเจฒเฉ เจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ เจฆเฉ เจชเจฟเฉฐเจก` | 2,358 | |
|
|
| 2 | `เจฆเจพ เจเฉฑเจ เจชเจฟเฉฐเจก เจนเฉ เจนเจตเจพเจฒเฉ` | 2,190 | |
|
|
| 3 | `เจชเจฟเฉฐเจก เจนเฉ เจนเจตเจพเจฒเฉ เจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ เจฆเฉ` | 1,587 | |
|
|
| 4 | `เจเฉฑเจ เจชเจฟเฉฐเจก เจนเฉ เจนเจตเจพเจฒเฉ เจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ` | 1,551 | |
|
|
| 5 | `เจเฉเจจ เจเฉเจฒเจพเจ เจธเจคเฉฐเจฌเจฐ เจ
เจเจคเฉเจฌเจฐ เจฆเจธเฉฐเจฌเจฐ` | 1,224 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**2-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `เจฐ _` | 970,300 | |
|
|
| 2 | `_ เจ
` | 824,969 | |
|
|
| 3 | `, _` | 781,870 | |
|
|
| 4 | `เจจ _` | 746,764 | |
|
|
| 5 | `เฅค _` | 733,291 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**3-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `_ เจตเจฟเฉฑ เจ` | 572,750 | |
|
|
| 2 | `เจตเจฟเฉฑ เจ _` | 533,677 | |
|
|
| 3 | `_ เจฆเฉ _` | 530,516 | |
|
|
| 4 | `เจ
เจคเฉ _` | 432,213 | |
|
|
| 5 | `_ เจ
เจคเฉ` | 431,849 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**4-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `_ เจตเจฟเฉฑ เจ _` | 533,074 | |
|
|
| 2 | `_ เจ
เจคเฉ _` | 431,071 | |
|
|
| 3 | `_ เจนเฉ เฅค _` | 249,093 | |
|
|
| 4 | `_ เจเฉฑ เจ _` | 216,221 | |
|
|
| 5 | `_ เจฒ เจ _` | 135,834 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**5-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `_ เจน เจจ เฅค _` | 79,400 | |
|
|
| 2 | `เจฆเจพ _ เจนเฉ เฅค _` | 69,651 | |
|
|
| 3 | `_ เจ เจฐ เจจ _` | 56,253 | |
|
|
| 4 | `_ เจ เจธ เจจเฉ _` | 53,553 | |
|
|
| 5 | `_ เจนเฉ เฅค _ เจ` | 51,650 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Perplexity:** 2-gram (subword) with 1,824 |
|
|
- **Entropy Trend:** Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable) |
|
|
- **Coverage:** Top-1000 patterns cover ~14% 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 | 0.7819 | 1.719 | 8.40 | 605,913 | 21.8% | |
|
|
| **1** | Subword | 0.7222 | 1.650 | 10.75 | 17,141 | 27.8% | |
|
|
| **2** | Word | 0.3690 | 1.291 | 2.26 | 5,085,870 | 63.1% | |
|
|
| **2** | Subword | 0.7395 | 1.670 | 6.01 | 184,279 | 26.0% | |
|
|
| **3** | Word | 0.1540 | 1.113 | 1.34 | 11,467,166 | 84.6% | |
|
|
| **3** | Subword | 0.5675 | 1.482 | 3.86 | 1,107,278 | 43.2% | |
|
|
| **4** | Word | 0.0639 ๐ | 1.045 | 1.11 | 15,379,661 | 93.6% | |
|
|
| **4** | Subword | 0.4313 | 1.348 | 2.39 | 4,276,620 | 56.9% | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Generated Text Samples (Word-based) |
|
|
|
|
|
Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model: |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 1:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ เจซเฉเฉฑเจเจพเจ เจฆเฉ เจตเจเจพเจฒเจค เจตเฉ เจนเจจ เจจเจฟเฉฑเจเฉ เจ
เจคเฉ เจซเจฟเจฐ เจนเฉเจตเฉ เจเฉเจ เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ เจฎเจพเจฐเฉเจเจ เจเจพเจเจฆเฉเจเจ เจนเจจ เจเจจเจฎ` |
|
|
2. `เจฆเฉ เจจเจพเจฒ เจธเจจเจฎเจพเจจเจฟเจค เจเฉเจคเจพ เจคเจพเจ เจฆเฉเจตเฉ เจฎเจนเจพเจคเจฎเจฏเจฎ เจ
เจจเฉเจธเจพเจฐ เจเจธเจจเฉ เจเจฐเจเจพ เจเฉเจธเจผเจฒเจคเจพ เจจเจพเจฒ เจนเจฐเจพเจเจ 24 เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ เจชเฉเจธเจพ` |
|
|
3. `เจนเฉ 3 october egyptclay sai jayalakshmy jayaram montinee tangphong thassha december retrieved 25 เจธเฉเจฐเฉ...` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 2:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `เจเจพเจเจฆเจพ เจนเฉ เจฎเฉเจเจผเจฒ เจธเจฎเจฐเจพเจ เจ
เจเจฌเจฐ เจฆเฉ เจฎเฉเฉฑเจ เจญเฉเจฎเจฟเจเจพ เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ เจฒเจฟเจเจฆเฉ เจนเจจ เจเจฟ เจเจเจผเจพเจฆเฉ เจคเฉเจ เจฌเจพเจ
เจฆ เจเจธเจจเฉเฉฐ เจเจฟเจเจจ` |
|
|
2. `เจเจฟเจ เจธเฉ เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ เจเจธ เจธเจฅเจฟเจคเฉ เจจเฉเฉฐ เจเจคเจฎ เจนเฉ เจเจฟเจ เจเจธ เจเฉฑเจฒ เจฆเฉ เจชเฉเจธเจผเจเฉ เจเฉเจคเฉ เจเจฟ เจธเจพเจฐเจพ เจจเฉ` |
|
|
3. `เจคเฉเจฐ เจคเฉ เจฐเจพเจ เจฌเจฟเจนเจพเจฐ เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ เจเฉเจเฉ เจธเฉเจงเจพเจฐ เจฆเฉ เจธเจฎเฉเจ เจคเฉเจ เจเฉฑเจฅเฉ เจ เจเฉ เจเจพเจ เจฎเจฟเจฐเจเจพเจ เจธเจผเจพเจฎเจฒ เจเจฐเจฆเจพ` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 3:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `เจเฉเจคเจพ เจเจฟเจ เจธเฉ เจฎเจนเจพเจฐเจพเจธเจผเจเจฐ เจธเจฐเจเจพเจฐ เจจเฉ เจธเจฎเจพเจเจฟเจ เจตเจฟเจเจฟเจเจจ เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ เจฆเฉเจธเจผ เจฆเจพ เจธเจญ เจคเฉเจ เจฎเจเจฌเฉเจฒ เจเจนเจพเจฃเฉ big two hearted` |
|
|
2. `เจฆเฉ เจฐเฉเจช เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ เจธเจผเจพเจฎเจฒ เจเฉเจคเจพ เจเจฟเจ เจนเฉ เจเจฟเจธ เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ เจซเจพเจฐเจธเฉ เจ
เจคเฉ เจฏเฉเจจเจพเจจเฉเจเจ เจจเฉ เจฎเจธเจผเจนเฉเจฐ เจเจพเจจเจพ เจเฉ เจฎเจงเฉเจฎเฉฑเจเฉเจเจ เจคเฉเจ` |
|
|
3. `เจเจฟเจนเจพ เจเจพเจเจฆเจพ เจนเฉ เจชเจฐเฉฐเจชเจฐเจพ เจฆเฉ เจธเฉฐเจฌเฉฐเจง เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ เจเฉเจเจฌเจฐเจฟเจ เจฏเฉเจจเฉเจตเจฐเจธเจฟเจเฉ เจฆเฉ เจนเจฟเจธเจพเจฌเจฆเจพเจจ เจเฉฑเจ เจเฉฑเจซเจผ เจฌเฉเจเจฐ เจ
เจคเฉ เจ เจกเจฌเจฒเจฟเจ เจนเฉเจฌเจธเจจ` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 4:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `เจธเจพเจฒ เจฆเฉ เจเจฎเจฐ เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ เจเจธเจฆเฉ เจฎเฉเจค เจนเฉ เจเจ เจเจธเจจเฉ เจเจชเจฃเจพ เจเฉเจตเจจ เจเจชเจฃเฉ เจชเจคเฉ เจ
เจคเฉ เจเฉฑเจ เจฌเฉเจเฉ เจจเจพเจฒ เจเฉเจจเฉเจกเจพ เจฆเฉ` |
|
|
2. `เจฆเจพ เจเฉฑเจ เจชเจฟเฉฐเจก เจนเฉ เจนเจตเจพเจฒเฉ เจเจผเจฟเจฒเฉเจนเฉ เจฆเฉ เจชเจฟเฉฐเจก เจฌเจฒเจพเจ เจฆเฉ เจชเจฟเฉฐเจก` |
|
|
3. `เจตเฉ เจเจฟเจนเจพ เจเจพเจเจฆเจพ เจนเฉ เจฆเฉเจเจฐเจพ เจตเจฐเจคเฉ เจเจพเจเจฆเฉ เจเฉฑเจ เจตเฉฑเจเจฐเฉ เจเจฟเจธเจฎ เจฆเฉ เจเจฟเจคเจพเจฌ เจนเฉ เจเจฟเจธ เจเฉเจนเฉเจจ เจฆเจฐเจฟเจ เจฎเฉฐเจจเจฟเจ เจเจฟเจ เจนเฉ` |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Generated Text Samples (Subword-based) |
|
|
|
|
|
Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model: |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 1:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `_rstederishjh_เจเฉเจฐเจพ` |
|
|
2. `เจฐ_เจฎเฉเฉฑเจ_เจตเจฟเจ_they:_เจฎเจพเจ_` |
|
|
3. `เจธเจจเฉ_เจชเฉเจฆเจพ_เจ
เจญเจฟเจจเฉ_เจธเฉเฅค_เจนเฉเฅค_` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 2:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `เจฐ_เจฌเจฃเฉ_เจธเฉฐเจเฉเจฐเจนเจฟเจฃ_เจตเจพเจเจเจ_เจฌเจพเจน` |
|
|
2. `_เจ
เจคเฉ_เจเจผเฉเจจ_เจฏเฉเจจเฉเจตเจฐเจฎ_เจเจฟเจธเจจเฉเฉฐ_` |
|
|
3. `,_เจเฉเจกเจพเจ_เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ_เจเจน_เจเฉเจฎเจพ_เจชเฉเฉเจนเจพ` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 3:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `_เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ_เจชเฉเจฒเฉเจเจ_เจนเจจเฅค_เจเจน_เจเจชเจฃเฉ` |
|
|
2. `เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ_เจนเฉเจเจ_เจ
เจคเฉ_เจฐเจธเจฎเฉ)_เจเจพเจ_เจฌ` |
|
|
3. `_เจฆเฉ_เจจเจพเจฒ_เจธเฉฐเจฌเฉฐเจง_เจฐเฉฑเจเจฆเฉ_เจนเจจเฅค_` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 4:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `_เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ_เจเฉฑเจ_เจธเจฐเฉเจค_เจเจฟเจธ_เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ_เจฒเจฟเจ` |
|
|
2. `_เจ
เจคเฉ_เจเจฐเจจเฉเจฒ_เจจเจชเฉเจฒเฉเจ
เจจ(20_เจซเฉเฉฑ` |
|
|
3. `_เจนเฉเฅค_เจฎเฉเจซเจค_เจธเจฟเจฐเจพเจ-เจเจฆ-เจฆเฉเจฒเจพ_เจฆเฉ` |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### 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 (4,276,620 contexts) |
|
|
- **Recommendation:** Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
## 4. Vocabulary Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
### Statistics |
|
|
|
|
|
| Metric | Value | |
|
|
|--------|-------| |
|
|
| Vocabulary Size | 242,047 | |
|
|
| Total Tokens | 18,725,732 | |
|
|
| Mean Frequency | 77.36 | |
|
|
| Median Frequency | 4 | |
|
|
| Frequency Std Dev | 2689.48 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Most Common Words |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Word | Frequency | |
|
|
|------|------|-----------| |
|
|
| 1 | เจตเจฟเฉฑเจ | 572,433 | |
|
|
| 2 | เจฆเฉ | 531,722 | |
|
|
| 3 | เจนเฉ | 471,753 | |
|
|
| 4 | เจ
เจคเฉ | 432,771 | |
|
|
| 5 | เจฆเฉ | 370,327 | |
|
|
| 6 | เจจเฉเฉฐ | 275,364 | |
|
|
| 7 | เจฆเจพ | 267,922 | |
|
|
| 8 | เจธเฉ | 222,609 | |
|
|
| 9 | เจเฉฑเจ | 219,966 | |
|
|
| 10 | เจคเฉเจ | 188,860 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Least Common Words (from vocabulary) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Word | Frequency | |
|
|
|------|------|-----------| |
|
|
| 1 | เจธเฉเฉฐเจฆเจฐเจจเจฐ | 2 | |
|
|
| 2 | เจเฉฑเจเจฐเจพเจ | 2 | |
|
|
| 3 | divyakirti | 2 | |
|
|
| 4 | csie | 2 | |
|
|
| 5 | เจตเจฟเจเจพเจฒเฉ | 2 | |
|
|
| 6 | เจธเจผเจฎเจคเฉเจเฉเจต | 2 | |
|
|
| 7 | bvsc | 2 | |
|
|
| 8 | mvph | 2 | |
|
|
| 9 | เจเฉฑเจฒเฉเจฎเจพเจฐเจพเจ | 2 | |
|
|
| 10 | sarkaryawah | 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Zipf's Law Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
| Metric | Value | |
|
|
|--------|-------| |
|
|
| Zipf Coefficient | 1.1016 | |
|
|
| Rยฒ (Goodness of Fit) | 0.993300 | |
|
|
| Adherence Quality | **excellent** | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Coverage Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
| Top N Words | Coverage | |
|
|
|-------------|----------| |
|
|
| Top 100 | 40.3% | |
|
|
| Top 1,000 | 64.7% | |
|
|
| Top 5,000 | 81.6% | |
|
|
| Top 10,000 | 87.3% | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Zipf Compliance:** Rยฒ=0.9933 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law |
|
|
- **High Frequency Dominance:** Top 100 words cover 40.3% of corpus |
|
|
- **Long Tail:** 232,047 words needed for remaining 12.7% 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 | 0.8342 ๐ | 0.3762 | N/A | N/A | |
|
|
| **mono_64d** | 64 | 0.8303 | 0.3067 | N/A | N/A | |
|
|
| **mono_128d** | 128 | 0.8116 | 0.2410 | N/A | N/A | |
|
|
| **aligned_32d** | 32 | 0.8342 | 0.3832 | 0.0760 | 0.3300 | |
|
|
| **aligned_64d** | 64 | 0.8303 | 0.3087 | 0.1300 | 0.4120 | |
|
|
| **aligned_128d** | 128 | 0.8116 | 0.2355 | 0.1700 | 0.4920 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Isotropy:** mono_32d with 0.8342 (more uniform distribution) |
|
|
- **Semantic Density:** Average pairwise similarity of 0.3085. Lower values indicate better semantic separation. |
|
|
- **Alignment Quality:** Aligned models achieve up to 17.0% 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 | **-0.529** | 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 | |
|
|
|--------|----------| |
|
|
| `-เจธ` | เจธเฉฑเจฌเจฒเจเจธเจผเจฎเฉ, เจธเจชเจฟเจจเฉเจเจผเจพ, เจธเจตเจฐเฉ | |
|
|
| `-เจ` | เจเจฟเจธเจฎเฉเจ, เจเฉเจฒเจตเจฟเจจ, เจเฉเจฎเจพเจฐ | |
|
|
| `-เจฎ` | เจฎเฉฐเจกเฉ, เจฎเจพเจฐเจเจจเฉ, เจฎเฉเจนเจจเจเจพเจงเจฒ | |
|
|
| `-เจฌ` | เจฌเจฟเจญเฉเจคเฉเจญเฉเจธเจผเจฃ, เจฌเฉเจฐเฉเจจเฉ, เจฌเจเจพเจ | |
|
|
| `-เจช` | เจชเจฒเฉฑเจเจกเจผ, เจชเฉเจกเจฌเจฒเจฏเฉเจ, เจชเฉฑเจเจฎเฉฑเจฒ | |
|
|
| `-เจ
` | เจ
เจคเจจเฉ, เจ
เจธเจพเจเจ, เจ
เจตเจพเจฐเจกxbiz | |
|
|
| `-เจฐ` | เจฐเจพเจเจเฉเจฐ, เจฐเฉเจธเจผเฉเจฌเจพเจเจผ, เจฐเจตเจพเจเจคเฉ | |
|
|
| `-เจต` | เจตเจฒเฉฑเจฒเฉ, เจตเจฟเจธเจพเจฏเจจ, เจตเจฟเจฆเจเจเจ | |
|
|
|
|
|
#### Productive Suffixes |
|
|
| Suffix | Examples | |
|
|
|--------|----------| |
|
|
| `-เจจ` | เจฆเจตเฉเจชเจพเจเจจ, เจเฉเจฌเฉเจจ, เจซเจพเจฐเฉเจจ | |
|
|
| `-เจฐ` | เจเฉเจฐเจฌเฉเจฐ, เจฏเฉเจเจคเจพเจธเฉเจชเจฐ, เจเจฒเจฟเจตเจฐ | |
|
|
| `-เจธ` | เจเจตเจฐเจเฉเจจเจธ, เจเฉเจจเจฟเจจเจธ, เจเฉเจจเจเจธ | |
|
|
| `-s` | missions, legs, democracies | |
|
|
| `-เจฒ` | เจฎเฉเจนเจจเจเจพเจงเจฒ, เจธเจเฉเจฒ, เจชเฉฑเจเจฎเฉฑเจฒ | |
|
|
| `-เจ` | เจจเจพเจธเจคเจพเจฒเจฟเจ, เจเจเจ, เจ
เจ | |
|
|
| `-เจฎ` | เจฆเฉเจฎ, เจจเจฟเจฎเจพเจเจจเจฎ, เจญเจพเจเจฎ | |
|
|
| `-n` | anchan, broughton, ceylon | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 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 | |
|
|
|------|----------|------------------|----------| |
|
|
| `indi` | 3.26x | 45 contexts | indic, hindi, indie | |
|
|
| `ress` | 3.17x | 50 contexts | cress, press, dress | |
|
|
| `atio` | 3.32x | 38 contexts | ratio, lation, nation | |
|
|
| `vers` | 3.08x | 47 contexts | versa, verso, verse | |
|
|
| `nter` | 3.08x | 45 contexts | enter, inter, unter | |
|
|
| `tion` | 3.01x | 48 contexts | lation, option, nation | |
|
|
| `ment` | 3.15x | 37 contexts | mente, mentem, cement | |
|
|
| `stor` | 3.11x | 35 contexts | astor, jstor, stork | |
|
|
| `ture` | 3.05x | 34 contexts | mature, nature, future | |
|
|
| `iver` | 3.13x | 29 contexts | diver, river, giver | |
|
|
| `ctio` | 3.05x | 25 contexts | action, auction, section | |
|
|
| `mber` | 3.12x | 22 contexts | ember, amber, number | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 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 | |
|
|
|--------|--------|-----------|----------| |
|
|
| `-เจ` | `-เจจ` | 41 words | เจเฉเจฒเฉเจกเฉเจจเฉเจ
เจจ, เจเจฐเจคเฉฑเจตเจชเฉเจฐเจจ | |
|
|
| `-เจธ` | `-เจจ` | 37 words | เจธเฉฐเจฐเจเจจ, เจธเจฟเจตเจจ | |
|
|
| `-เจธ` | `-เจฐ` | 31 words | เจธเฉเจฒเจพเจเจเฉเจฐ, เจธเจพเจฐเจคเฉเจฐ | |
|
|
| `-เจธ` | `-เจ` | 26 words | เจธเจฎเจพเจจเจเจฐเจฅเจ, เจธเจเฉเจชเจเจฟเจ | |
|
|
| `-เจ` | `-เจฐ` | 26 words | เจเฉเจจเจฐ, เจเฉเจฌเจฐ | |
|
|
| `-เจฎ` | `-เจจ` | 19 words | เจฎเฉเจฐเฉเจจ, เจฎเฉเจเฉเฉฐเจฆเจจ | |
|
|
| `-เจฎ` | `-เจฐ` | 17 words | เจฎเฉฐเจเจฐเฉเจเจฐ, เจฎเจฟเจเจฐ | |
|
|
| `-เจฌ` | `-เจจ` | 17 words | เจฌเฉเจเฉเจเจธเฉเจจ, เจฌเฉเจฐเฉเจฎเฉเจจ | |
|
|
| `-เจช` | `-เจจ` | 16 words | เจชเฉเจฅเจจ, เจชเฉเจฐเจธเจพเจธเจจ | |
|
|
| `-เจฐ` | `-เจจ` | 16 words | เจฐเฉเจชเจตเจพเจจ, เจฐเจเฉเจจเจพเจฅเจจ | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 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 | |
|
|
|------|-----------------|------------|------| |
|
|
| intentions | **`intention-s`** | 4.5 | `intention` | |
|
|
| เจ
เจคเจพเจเฉฑเจฒเฉเจนเจพ | **`เจ
-เจค-เจพเจเฉฑเจฒเฉเจนเจพ`** | 4.5 | `เจพเจเฉฑเจฒเฉเจนเจพ` | |
|
|
| orientale | **`oriental-e`** | 4.5 | `oriental` | |
|
|
| presented | **`present-ed`** | 4.5 | `present` | |
|
|
| ecosystems | **`ecosystem-s`** | 4.5 | `ecosystem` | |
|
|
| เจตเจฟเจธเจผเจตเฉฐเจญเจฐเจจ | **`เจตเจฟเจธเจผเจตเฉฐเจญเจฐ-เจจ`** | 4.5 | `เจตเจฟเจธเจผเจตเฉฐเจญเจฐ` | |
|
|
| commissioner | **`commission-er`** | 4.5 | `commission` | |
|
|
| potentials | **`potential-s`** | 4.5 | `potential` | |
|
|
| เจ
เจเจผเจนเฉเจเจฆเจฐเจพ | **`เจ
-เจ-เจผเจนเฉเจเจฆเจฐเจพ`** | 4.5 | `เจผเจนเฉเจเจฆเจฐเจพ` | |
|
|
| manhattans | **`manhattan-s`** | 4.5 | `manhattan` | |
|
|
| neighbors | **`neighbor-s`** | 4.5 | `neighbor` | |
|
|
| เจนเจพเจฐเจชเจฐเจเฉเจฒเจฟเจจเจธ | **`เจนเจพเจฐเจชเจฐเจเฉเจฒเจฟเจจ-เจธ`** | 4.5 | `เจนเจพเจฐเจชเจฐเจเฉเจฒเจฟเจจ` | |
|
|
| audiobooks | **`audiobook-s`** | 4.5 | `audiobook` | |
|
|
| capitalists | **`capitalist-s`** | 4.5 | `capitalist` | |
|
|
| เจเจฒเฉเจเจเฉเจฐเจพเจจ | **`เจเจฒเฉเจเจเฉเจฐเจพ-เจจ`** | 4.5 | `เจเจฒเฉเจเจเฉเจฐเจพ` | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 6.6 Linguistic Interpretation |
|
|
|
|
|
> **Automated Insight:** |
|
|
The language Punjabi 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 (4.04x) | |
|
|
| N-gram | **2-gram** | Lowest perplexity (1,824) | |
|
|
| 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) ร 100%. Indicates how deterministic the model's predictions are. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *Intuition:* 100% predictability means the next word is always certain; 0% means completely random. Real text falls between these extremes. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *What to seek:* Higher predictability for text generation quality, but too high (>98%) may produce repetitive output. |
|
|
|
|
|
### Vocabulary & Zipf's Law Metrics |
|
|
|
|
|
**Zipf's Coefficient** |
|
|
> *Definition:* The slope of the log-log plot of word frequency vs. rank. Zipf's law predicts this should be approximately -1. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *Intuition:* A coefficient near -1 indicates the corpus follows natural language patterns where a few words are very common and most words are rare. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *What to seek:* Values between -0.8 and -1.2 indicate healthy natural language distribution. Deviations may suggest domain-specific or artificial text. |
|
|
|
|
|
**Rยฒ (Coefficient of Determination)** |
|
|
> *Definition:* Measures how well the linear fit explains the frequency-rank relationship. Ranges from 0 to 1. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *Intuition:* Rยฒ near 1.0 means the data closely follows Zipf's law; lower values indicate deviation from expected word frequency patterns. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *What to seek:* Rยฒ > 0.95 is excellent; > 0.99 indicates near-perfect Zipf adherence typical of large natural corpora. |
|
|
|
|
|
**Vocabulary Coverage** |
|
|
> *Definition:* Cumulative percentage of corpus tokens accounted for by the top N words. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *Intuition:* Shows how concentrated word usage is. If top-100 words cover 50% of text, the corpus relies heavily on common words. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *What to seek:* Top-100 covering 30-50% is typical. Higher coverage indicates more repetitive text; lower suggests richer vocabulary. |
|
|
|
|
|
### Word Embedding Metrics |
|
|
|
|
|
**Isotropy** |
|
|
> *Definition:* Measures how uniformly distributed vectors are in the embedding space. Computed as the ratio of minimum to maximum singular values. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *Intuition:* High isotropy (near 1.0) means vectors spread evenly in all directions; low isotropy means vectors cluster in certain directions, reducing expressiveness. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *What to seek:* Higher isotropy generally indicates better-quality embeddings. Values > 0.1 are reasonable; > 0.3 is good. Lower-dimensional embeddings tend to have higher isotropy. |
|
|
|
|
|
**Average Norm** |
|
|
> *Definition:* Mean magnitude (L2 norm) of word vectors in the embedding space. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *Intuition:* Indicates the typical "length" of vectors. Consistent norms suggest stable training; high variance may indicate some words are undertrained. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *What to seek:* Relatively consistent norms across models. The absolute value matters less than consistency (low std deviation). |
|
|
|
|
|
**Cosine Similarity** |
|
|
> *Definition:* Measures angular similarity between vectors, ranging from -1 (opposite) to 1 (identical direction). |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *Intuition:* Words with similar meanings should have high cosine similarity. This is the standard metric for semantic relatedness in embeddings. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *What to seek:* Semantically related words should score > 0.5; unrelated words should be near 0. Synonyms often score > 0.7. |
|
|
|
|
|
**t-SNE Visualization** |
|
|
> *Definition:* t-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding - a dimensionality reduction technique that preserves local structure for visualization. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *Intuition:* Clusters in t-SNE plots indicate groups of semantically related words. Spread indicates vocabulary diversity; tight clusters suggest semantic coherence. |
|
|
> |
|
|
> *What to seek:* Meaningful clusters (e.g., numbers together, verbs together). Avoid over-interpreting distances - t-SNE preserves local, not global, structure. |
|
|
|
|
|
### General Interpretation Guidelines |
|
|
|
|
|
1. **Compare within model families:** Metrics are most meaningful when comparing models of the same type (e.g., 8k vs 64k tokenizer). |
|
|
2. **Consider trade-offs:** Better performance on one metric often comes at the cost of another (e.g., compression vs. OOV rate). |
|
|
3. **Context matters:** Optimal values depend on downstream tasks. Text generation may prioritize different metrics than classification. |
|
|
4. **Corpus influence:** All metrics are influenced by corpus characteristics. Wikipedia text differs from social media or literature. |
|
|
5. **Language-specific patterns:** Morphologically rich languages (like Arabic) may show different optimal ranges than analytic languages. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Visualizations Index |
|
|
|
|
|
| Visualization | Description | |
|
|
|---------------|-------------| |
|
|
| Tokenizer Compression | Compression ratios by vocabulary size | |
|
|
| Tokenizer Fertility | Average token length by vocabulary | |
|
|
| Tokenizer OOV | Unknown token rates | |
|
|
| Tokenizer Total Tokens | Total tokens by vocabulary | |
|
|
| N-gram Perplexity | Perplexity by n-gram size | |
|
|
| N-gram Entropy | Entropy by n-gram size | |
|
|
| N-gram Coverage | Top pattern coverage | |
|
|
| N-gram Unique | Unique n-gram counts | |
|
|
| Markov Entropy | Entropy by context size | |
|
|
| Markov Branching | Branching factor by context | |
|
|
| Markov Contexts | Unique context counts | |
|
|
| Zipf's Law | Frequency-rank distribution with fit | |
|
|
| Vocab Frequency | Word frequency distribution | |
|
|
| Top 20 Words | Most frequent words | |
|
|
| Vocab Coverage | Cumulative coverage curve | |
|
|
| Embedding Isotropy | Vector space uniformity | |
|
|
| Embedding Norms | Vector magnitude distribution | |
|
|
| Embedding Similarity | Word similarity heatmap | |
|
|
| Nearest Neighbors | Similar words for key terms | |
|
|
| t-SNE Words | 2D word embedding visualization | |
|
|
| t-SNE Sentences | 2D sentence embedding visualization | |
|
|
| Position Encoding | Encoding method comparison | |
|
|
| Model Sizes | Storage requirements | |
|
|
| Performance Dashboard | Comprehensive performance overview | |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
## About This Project |
|
|
|
|
|
### Data Source |
|
|
|
|
|
Models trained on [wikipedia-monthly](https://huggingface.co/datasets/omarkamali/wikipedia-monthly) - a monthly snapshot of Wikipedia articles across 300+ languages. |
|
|
|
|
|
### Project |
|
|
|
|
|
A project by **[Wikilangs](https://wikilangs.org)** - Open-source NLP models for every Wikipedia language. |
|
|
|
|
|
### Maintainer |
|
|
|
|
|
[Omar Kamali](https://omarkamali.com) - [Omneity Labs](https://omneitylabs.com) |
|
|
|
|
|
### Citation |
|
|
|
|
|
If you use these models in your research, please cite: |
|
|
|
|
|
```bibtex |
|
|
@misc{wikilangs2025, |
|
|
author = {Kamali, Omar}, |
|
|
title = {Wikilangs: Open NLP Models for Wikipedia Languages}, |
|
|
year = {2025}, |
|
|
doi = {10.5281/zenodo.18073153}, |
|
|
publisher = {Zenodo}, |
|
|
url = {https://huggingface.co/wikilangs} |
|
|
institution = {Omneity Labs} |
|
|
} |
|
|
``` |
|
|
|
|
|
### License |
|
|
|
|
|
MIT License - Free for academic and commercial use. |
|
|
|
|
|
### Links |
|
|
|
|
|
- ๐ Website: [wikilangs.org](https://wikilangs.org) |
|
|
- ๐ค Models: [huggingface.co/wikilangs](https://huggingface.co/wikilangs) |
|
|
- ๐ Data: [wikipedia-monthly](https://huggingface.co/datasets/omarkamali/wikipedia-monthly) |
|
|
- ๐ค Author: [Omar Kamali](https://huggingface.co/omarkamali) |
|
|
- ๐ค Sponsor: [Featherless AI](https://featherless.ai) |
|
|
--- |
|
|
*Generated by Wikilangs Models Pipeline* |
|
|
|
|
|
*Report Date: 2026-01-10 19:32:35* |
|
|
|