Palatine German - Wikilangs Models
Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study
This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on Palatine German Wikipedia data. We analyze tokenizers, n-gram models, Markov chains, vocabulary statistics, and word embeddings.
π Repository Contents
Models & Assets
- Tokenizers (8k, 16k, 32k, 64k)
- N-gram models (2, 3, 4, 5-gram)
- Markov chains (context of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5)
- Subword N-gram and Markov chains
- Embeddings in various sizes and dimensions (aligned and unaligned)
- Language Vocabulary
- Language Statistics
Analysis and Evaluation
- 1. Tokenizer Evaluation
- 2. N-gram Model Evaluation
- 3. Markov Chain Evaluation
- 4. Vocabulary Analysis
- 5. Word Embeddings Evaluation
- 6. Morphological Analysis (Experimental)
- 7. Summary & Recommendations
- Metrics Glossary
- Visualizations Index
1. Tokenizer Evaluation
Results
| Vocab Size | Compression | Avg Token Len | UNK Rate | Total Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8k | 3.530x | 3.53 | 0.2131% | 422,361 |
| 16k | 3.824x | 3.83 | 0.2308% | 389,933 |
| 32k | 4.130x | 4.13 | 0.2493% | 361,018 |
| 64k | 4.364x π | 4.37 | 0.2634% | 341,693 |
Tokenization Examples
Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size:
Sample 1: Trojany is en Ort im Pole mid 490 Oiwuhnern. Er liggt an Powiat WoΕomiΕski, Woiw...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | βtro j any βis βen βort βim βpole βmid β ... (+36 more) |
46 |
| 16k | βtro j any βis βen βort βim βpole βmid β ... (+33 more) |
43 |
| 32k | βtro j any βis βen βort βim βpole βmid β ... (+29 more) |
39 |
| 64k | βtrojany βis βen βort βim βpole βmid β 4 9 ... (+22 more) |
32 |
Sample 2: Linux mÀÀnd Linux (Kernel), ein Betriebssysdemkern GNU/Linux, ein Betriebssysdem...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | βlinux βmÀÀnd βlinux β( kern el ), βein βbetrieb ssy ... (+15 more) |
25 |
| 16k | βlinux βmÀÀnd βlinux β( kernel ), βein βbetrieb ssy sd ... (+14 more) |
24 |
| 32k | βlinux βmÀÀnd βlinux β( kernel ), βein βbetriebssy sdem kern ... (+10 more) |
20 |
| 64k | βlinux βmÀÀnd βlinux β( kernel ), βein βbetriebssysdem kern βgnu ... (+8 more) |
18 |
Sample 3: D Tirkei (TΓΌrkisch: TΓΌrkiye) isch Γ€n Schdaad in Siedoschdeuropa un Asie. *
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | βd βtir ke i β( t ΓΌr kisch : βtΓΌr ... (+13 more) |
23 |
| 16k | βd βtirkei β( t ΓΌr kisch : βtΓΌr ki ye ... (+11 more) |
21 |
| 32k | βd βtirkei β( tΓΌrkisch : βtΓΌr ki ye ) βisch ... (+9 more) |
19 |
| 64k | βd βtirkei β( tΓΌrkisch : βtΓΌrkiye ) βisch βΓ€n βschdaad ... (+6 more) |
16 |
Key Findings
- Best Compression: 64k achieves 4.364x compression
- Lowest UNK Rate: 8k with 0.2131% 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 | 1,596 | 10.64 | 7,895 | 42.8% | 67.2% |
| 2-gram | Subword | 299 π | 8.22 | 2,272 | 64.5% | 99.1% |
| 3-gram | Word | 749 | 9.55 | 6,606 | 57.5% | 78.8% |
| 3-gram | Subword | 2,462 | 11.27 | 20,249 | 25.5% | 69.2% |
| 4-gram | Word | 991 | 9.95 | 11,139 | 54.7% | 74.4% |
| 4-gram | Subword | 12,442 | 13.60 | 97,333 | 14.2% | 41.4% |
| 5-gram | Word | 718 | 9.49 | 8,011 | 58.2% | 78.9% |
| 5-gram | Subword | 36,102 | 15.14 | 218,622 | 9.6% | 29.9% |
Top 5 N-grams by Size
2-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | gheat zum |
5,157 |
| 2 | in de |
3,099 |
| 3 | vun de |
1,953 |
| 4 | im dΓ©partement |
1,735 |
| 5 | gemÀÀ im |
1,725 |
3-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | franzesische gemÀÀ im |
1,718 |
| 2 | e franzesische gemÀÀ |
1,718 |
| 3 | in de rechion |
1,717 |
| 4 | gheat zum kommunalvaband |
1,717 |
| 5 | gemÀÀ im département |
1,715 |
4-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | e franzesische gemÀÀ im |
1,716 |
| 2 | d gemÀÀ gheat zum |
1,714 |
| 3 | franzesische gemÀÀ im département |
1,713 |
| 4 | gheat zum kommunalvaband bevelkerungsentwicklung |
1,704 |
| 5 | zum kommunalvaband bevelkerungsentwicklung johr |
1,690 |
5-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | e franzesische gemÀÀ im département |
1,711 |
| 2 | gheat zum kommunalvaband bevelkerungsentwicklung johr |
1,690 |
| 3 | in de rechion grand est |
1,568 |
| 4 | de rechion grand est bis |
1,566 |
| 5 | gemÀÀ gheat zum im arrondissement |
1,554 |
2-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | c h |
112,146 |
| 2 | e _ |
97,880 |
| 3 | s c |
81,174 |
| 4 | _ d |
64,393 |
| 5 | e r |
59,433 |
3-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | s c h |
80,747 |
| 2 | i s c |
34,260 |
| 3 | d e _ |
29,075 |
| 4 | c h _ |
28,932 |
| 5 | _ d e |
24,776 |
4-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | i s c h |
34,189 |
| 2 | s c h d |
19,362 |
| 3 | s c h _ |
18,750 |
| 4 | _ d e _ |
15,435 |
| 5 | s c h e |
13,396 |
5-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | i s c h _ |
13,539 |
| 2 | _ d i e _ |
10,434 |
| 3 | _ v u n _ |
10,426 |
| 4 | i s c h e |
9,183 |
| 5 | s c h e _ |
8,980 |
Key Findings
- Best Perplexity: 2-gram (subword) with 299
- Entropy Trend: Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable)
- Coverage: Top-1000 patterns cover ~30% 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 | 0.6525 | 1.572 | 3.88 | 87,418 | 34.8% |
| 1 | Subword | 1.6269 | 3.089 | 14.27 | 301 | 0.0% |
| 2 | Word | 0.1624 | 1.119 | 1.32 | 338,517 | 83.8% |
| 2 | Subword | 1.2631 | 2.400 | 7.86 | 4,289 | 0.0% |
| 3 | Word | 0.0398 | 1.028 | 1.06 | 447,210 | 96.0% |
| 3 | Subword | 0.9921 | 1.989 | 4.67 | 33,685 | 0.8% |
| 4 | Word | 0.0112 π | 1.008 | 1.02 | 474,320 | 98.9% |
| 4 | Subword | 0.7156 | 1.642 | 2.82 | 157,397 | 28.4% |
Generated Text Samples (Word-based)
Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model:
Context Size 1:
de wache 2 370 366 393 418 420 415 oiwohner es bezirksomt de draditionell dialekt dedie schaidl vun montbΓ©liard gheat zum owerrhaialemannisch weblinks fuΓnote moselle in de rechion lot...vun daitschlond eestraisch in de draditionell dialekt patois vun de lothringisch dialekt de rechion ...
Context Size 2:
gheat zum un zum arrondissement geografie altviller licht vier kilometer im siedoschde vun de kΓ€wwer...in de rechion grand est bis elsass d gemÀÀ gheat zum lorrain fuΓnote mosellevun de kmg karl may gesellschaft Γ€rforsch alle dengbare unnalaache un noch mΓ€ geschichtstrΓ€chtiche b...
Context Size 3:
franzesische gemÀÀ im département moselle in de rechion grand est bis elsass d gemÀÀ gheat zum im ar...e franzesische gemÀÀ im département haut rhin owwaelsass in de rechion bourgogne franche comté bis r...gheat zum kommunalvaband bevelkerungsentwicklung johr 354 1 608 1 544 1 819 1 835 dialekt de elsÀssi...
Context Size 4:
e franzesische gemÀÀ im département moselle in de rechion grand est bis elsass d gemÀÀ gheat zum im ...d gemÀÀ gheat zum un zum arrondissement geografie oberhà gedà l licht 27 km vun mìlhüüse uf 473 m nn g...franzesische gemÀÀ im département moselle in de rechion grand est bis elsass d gemÀÀ gheat zum im ar...
Generated Text Samples (Subword-based)
Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model:
Context Size 1:
_opam_deammpeng'e_oschanchbalierige_d_hord_strt_
Context Size 2:
chi_is_alziff_fiee_ex_bels_daischeschnemand_hod,_we
Context Size 3:
schtur_derd_sitzenischazer_dur)_pol.de_humorgassem_gra
Context Size 4:
isch_de_vum_kribdesschdroffel_fronze_ssch_am_straΓe/aden_
Key Findings
- Best Predictability: Context-4 (word) with 98.9% predictability
- Branching Factor: Decreases with context size (more deterministic)
- Memory Trade-off: Larger contexts require more storage (157,397 contexts)
- Recommendation: Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation
4. Vocabulary Analysis
Statistics
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Vocabulary Size | 31,612 |
| Total Tokens | 506,872 |
| Mean Frequency | 16.03 |
| Median Frequency | 3 |
| Frequency Std Dev | 185.36 |
Most Common Words
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | de | 15,844 |
| 2 | die | 10,693 |
| 3 | vun | 10,475 |
| 4 | im | 8,905 |
| 5 | in | 8,633 |
| 6 | zum | 7,441 |
| 7 | un | 7,392 |
| 8 | isch | 5,887 |
| 9 | gheat | 5,376 |
| 10 | unn | 4,121 |
Least Common Words (from vocabulary)
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | atome | 2 |
| 2 | chomsky | 2 |
| 3 | pbk | 2 |
| 4 | zieschlschdÀÀ | 2 |
| 5 | middlb | 2 |
| 6 | owasadz | 2 |
| 7 | athena | 2 |
| 8 | volgsvasommlung | 2 |
| 9 | demosthenes | 2 |
| 10 | informale | 2 |
Zipf's Law Analysis
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Zipf Coefficient | 0.9887 |
| RΒ² (Goodness of Fit) | 0.997009 |
| Adherence Quality | excellent |
Coverage Analysis
| Top N Words | Coverage |
|---|---|
| Top 100 | 42.8% |
| Top 1,000 | 65.6% |
| Top 5,000 | 81.2% |
| Top 10,000 | 88.2% |
Key Findings
- Zipf Compliance: RΒ²=0.9970 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law
- High Frequency Dominance: Top 100 words cover 42.8% of corpus
- Long Tail: 21,612 words needed for remaining 11.8% 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 | 0.6495 π | 0.3590 | N/A | N/A |
| mono_64d | 64 | 0.2665 | 0.3523 | N/A | N/A |
| mono_128d | 128 | 0.0452 | 0.3632 | N/A | N/A |
| aligned_32d | 32 | 0.6495 | 0.3596 | 0.0320 | 0.1440 |
| aligned_64d | 64 | 0.2665 | 0.3544 | 0.0380 | 0.2340 |
| aligned_128d | 128 | 0.0452 | 0.3633 | 0.0500 | 0.2340 |
Key Findings
- Best Isotropy: mono_32d with 0.6495 (more uniform distribution)
- Semantic Density: Average pairwise similarity of 0.3586. Lower values indicate better semantic separation.
- Alignment Quality: Aligned models achieve up to 5.0% 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 | 1.639 | 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 |
|---|---|
-b |
but, batschdorf, bermont |
-s |
schdradegije, sorgt, schauschbielarin |
-g |
getΓΆtet, ganzes, grieche |
-ge |
getΓΆtet, gebredelde, geschischt |
-d |
diedesfelder, demag, dringge |
-a |
arie, angegliederd, aiΓerschde |
-h |
helmut, hawwn, heest |
-k |
kobuasch, kurpfΓ€lzischen, kommunalbolidig |
Productive Suffixes
| Suffix | Examples |
|---|---|
-e |
arie, schdradegije, dringge |
-ch |
kobuasch, wissenschaftlich, dedisch |
-d |
caschdafeld, johrhunnerd, Γ©fΓ€gd |
-h |
kobuasch, wissenschaftlich, dedisch |
-er |
diedesfelder, walther, ΓΌber |
-he |
grieche, griesche, indraache |
-r |
wehr, diedesfelder, walther |
-n |
inschdiduzion, estimation, jedermann |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
schd |
1.54x | 480 contexts | schdΓ€, schdr, Γ€schd |
chde |
1.71x | 154 contexts | achde, echde, Γ€schde |
disc |
1.67x | 81 contexts | disch, dischd, discht |
rsch |
1.50x | 127 contexts | ersch, Γ€rsch, aarsch |
scht |
1.57x | 101 contexts | oscht, escht, sischt |
lisc |
1.66x | 76 contexts | lisch, lische, lischd |
aisc |
1.68x | 70 contexts | aisch, aischn, waisch |
scha |
1.50x | 107 contexts | schad, ischa, schal |
chda |
1.61x | 66 contexts | dochda, schdad, schdag |
schb |
1.53x | 67 contexts | schbed, schbet, eschbe |
ersc |
1.59x | 55 contexts | ersch, mersch, bersch |
gsch |
1.49x | 68 contexts | gschid, gugsch, Γ€ngscht |
6.4 Affix Compatibility (Co-occurrence)
This table shows which prefixes and suffixes most frequently co-occur on the same stems, revealing the 'stacking' rules of the language's morphology.
| Prefix | Suffix | Frequency | Examples |
|---|---|---|---|
-s |
-e |
182 words | schdadtdeile, schreibmaschine |
-b |
-e |
137 words | bekannteschte, baigedrede |
-g |
-e |
124 words | geboore, ghaisse |
-a |
-e |
97 words | arweide, agduelle |
-g |
-d |
86 words | gfoldad, generalkonsulad |
-e |
-e |
84 words | erschte, einige |
-m |
-e |
76 words | mihlhause, massnohme |
-k |
-e |
74 words | koreanische, karte |
-b |
-d |
74 words | beowachd, bedeidend |
-g |
-t |
64 words | gewechselt, geghert |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| schwanheim | schwan-he-im |
7.5 | he |
| endschaidend | endschaid-e-nd |
7.5 | e |
| abgedrede | abgedr-e-de |
7.5 | e |
| schwobsheim | schwobs-he-im |
7.5 | he |
| grumbeere | grumbe-er-e |
7.5 | er |
| unnerscheid | unnersc-he-id |
7.5 | he |
| iwwerfiere | iwwerfi-er-e |
7.5 | er |
| grafendahn | grafenda-h-n |
7.5 | h |
| zunehmend | zunehm-e-nd |
7.5 | e |
| oigerischded | oigerischd-e-d |
7.5 | e |
| skanderbeg | skanderb-e-g |
7.5 | e |
| schdroofe | schdroo-f-e |
7.5 | f |
| schbaijara | schbaija-r-a |
7.5 | r |
| wahrschoints | wahrschoin-t-s |
7.5 | t |
| komblizierd | komblizi-er-d |
7.5 | er |
6.6 Linguistic Interpretation
Automated Insight: The language Palatine German shows high morphological productivity. The subword models are significantly more efficient than word models, suggesting a rich system of affixation or compounding.
Note on Idiomaticity: The high Idiomaticity Gap suggests a large number of frequent multi-word expressions or formulaic sequences that are statistically distinct from their component parts.
7. Summary & Recommendations
Production Recommendations
| Component | Recommended | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Tokenizer | 64k BPE | Best compression (4.36x) |
| N-gram | 2-gram | Lowest perplexity (299) |
| Markov | Context-4 | Highest predictability (98.9%) |
| Embeddings | 100d | Balanced semantic capture and isotropy |
Appendix: Metrics Glossary & Interpretation Guide
This section provides definitions, intuitions, and guidance for interpreting the metrics used throughout this report.
Tokenizer Metrics
Compression Ratio
Definition: The ratio of characters to tokens (chars/token). Measures how efficiently the tokenizer represents text.
Intuition: Higher compression means fewer tokens needed to represent the same text, reducing sequence lengths for downstream models. A 3x compression means ~3 characters per token on average.
What to seek: Higher is generally better for efficiency, but extremely high compression may indicate overly aggressive merging that loses morphological information.
Average Token Length (Fertility)
Definition: Mean number of characters per token produced by the tokenizer.
Intuition: Reflects the granularity of tokenization. Longer tokens capture more context but may struggle with rare words; shorter tokens are more flexible but increase sequence length.
What to seek: Balance between 2-5 characters for most languages. Arabic/morphologically-rich languages may benefit from slightly longer tokens.
Unknown Token Rate (OOV Rate)
Definition: Percentage of tokens that map to the unknown/UNK token, indicating words the tokenizer cannot represent.
Intuition: Lower OOV means better vocabulary coverage. High OOV indicates the tokenizer encounters many unseen character sequences.
What to seek: Below 1% is excellent; below 5% is acceptable. BPE tokenizers typically achieve very low OOV due to subword fallback.
N-gram Model Metrics
Perplexity
Definition: Measures how "surprised" the model is by test data. Mathematically: 2^(cross-entropy). Lower values indicate better prediction.
Intuition: If perplexity is 100, the model is as uncertain as if choosing uniformly among 100 options at each step. A perplexity of 10 means effectively choosing among 10 equally likely options.
What to seek: Lower is better. Perplexity decreases with larger n-grams (more context). Values vary widely by language and corpus size.
Entropy
Definition: Average information content (in bits) needed to encode the next token given the context. Related to perplexity: perplexity = 2^entropy.
Intuition: High entropy means high uncertainty/randomness; low entropy means predictable patterns. Natural language typically has entropy between 1-4 bits per character.
What to seek: Lower entropy indicates more predictable text patterns. Entropy should decrease as n-gram size increases.
Coverage (Top-K)
Definition: Percentage of corpus occurrences explained by the top K most frequent n-grams.
Intuition: High coverage with few patterns indicates repetitive/formulaic text; low coverage suggests diverse vocabulary usage.
What to seek: Depends on use case. For language modeling, moderate coverage (40-60% with top-1000) is typical for natural text.
Markov Chain Metrics
Average Entropy
Definition: Mean entropy across all contexts, measuring average uncertainty in next-word prediction.
Intuition: Lower entropy means the model is more confident about what comes next. Context-1 has high entropy (many possible next words); Context-4 has low entropy (few likely continuations).
What to seek: Decreasing entropy with larger context sizes. Very low entropy (<0.1) indicates highly deterministic transitions.
Branching Factor
Definition: Average number of unique next tokens observed for each context.
Intuition: High branching = many possible continuations (flexible but uncertain); low branching = few options (predictable but potentially repetitive).
What to seek: Branching factor should decrease with context size. Values near 1.0 indicate nearly deterministic chains.
Predictability
Definition: Derived metric: (1 - normalized_entropy) Γ 100%. Indicates how deterministic the model's predictions are.
Intuition: 100% predictability means the next word is always certain; 0% means completely random. Real text falls between these extremes.
What to seek: Higher predictability for text generation quality, but too high (>98%) may produce repetitive output.
Vocabulary & Zipf's Law Metrics
Zipf's Coefficient
Definition: The slope of the log-log plot of word frequency vs. rank. Zipf's law predicts this should be approximately -1.
Intuition: A coefficient near -1 indicates the corpus follows natural language patterns where a few words are very common and most words are rare.
What to seek: Values between -0.8 and -1.2 indicate healthy natural language distribution. Deviations may suggest domain-specific or artificial text.
RΒ² (Coefficient of Determination)
Definition: Measures how well the linear fit explains the frequency-rank relationship. Ranges from 0 to 1.
Intuition: RΒ² near 1.0 means the data closely follows Zipf's law; lower values indicate deviation from expected word frequency patterns.
What to seek: RΒ² > 0.95 is excellent; > 0.99 indicates near-perfect Zipf adherence typical of large natural corpora.
Vocabulary Coverage
Definition: Cumulative percentage of corpus tokens accounted for by the top N words.
Intuition: Shows how concentrated word usage is. If top-100 words cover 50% of text, the corpus relies heavily on common words.
What to seek: Top-100 covering 30-50% is typical. Higher coverage indicates more repetitive text; lower suggests richer vocabulary.
Word Embedding Metrics
Isotropy
Definition: Measures how uniformly distributed vectors are in the embedding space. Computed as the ratio of minimum to maximum singular values.
Intuition: High isotropy (near 1.0) means vectors spread evenly in all directions; low isotropy means vectors cluster in certain directions, reducing expressiveness.
What to seek: Higher isotropy generally indicates better-quality embeddings. Values > 0.1 are reasonable; > 0.3 is good. Lower-dimensional embeddings tend to have higher isotropy.
Average Norm
Definition: Mean magnitude (L2 norm) of word vectors in the embedding space.
Intuition: Indicates the typical "length" of vectors. Consistent norms suggest stable training; high variance may indicate some words are undertrained.
What to seek: Relatively consistent norms across models. The absolute value matters less than consistency (low std deviation).
Cosine Similarity
Definition: Measures angular similarity between vectors, ranging from -1 (opposite) to 1 (identical direction).
Intuition: Words with similar meanings should have high cosine similarity. This is the standard metric for semantic relatedness in embeddings.
What to seek: Semantically related words should score > 0.5; unrelated words should be near 0. Synonyms often score > 0.7.
t-SNE Visualization
Definition: t-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding - a dimensionality reduction technique that preserves local structure for visualization.
Intuition: Clusters in t-SNE plots indicate groups of semantically related words. Spread indicates vocabulary diversity; tight clusters suggest semantic coherence.
What to seek: Meaningful clusters (e.g., numbers together, verbs together). Avoid over-interpreting distances - t-SNE preserves local, not global, structure.
General Interpretation Guidelines
- Compare within model families: Metrics are most meaningful when comparing models of the same type (e.g., 8k vs 64k tokenizer).
- Consider trade-offs: Better performance on one metric often comes at the cost of another (e.g., compression vs. OOV rate).
- Context matters: Optimal values depend on downstream tasks. Text generation may prioritize different metrics than classification.
- Corpus influence: All metrics are influenced by corpus characteristics. Wikipedia text differs from social media or literature.
- Language-specific patterns: Morphologically rich languages (like Arabic) may show different optimal ranges than analytic languages.
Visualizations Index
| Visualization | Description |
|---|---|
| Tokenizer Compression | Compression ratios by vocabulary size |
| Tokenizer Fertility | Average token length by vocabulary |
| Tokenizer OOV | Unknown token rates |
| Tokenizer Total Tokens | Total tokens by vocabulary |
| N-gram Perplexity | Perplexity by n-gram size |
| N-gram Entropy | Entropy by n-gram size |
| N-gram Coverage | Top pattern coverage |
| N-gram Unique | Unique n-gram counts |
| Markov Entropy | Entropy by context size |
| Markov Branching | Branching factor by context |
| Markov Contexts | Unique context counts |
| Zipf's Law | Frequency-rank distribution with fit |
| Vocab Frequency | Word frequency distribution |
| Top 20 Words | Most frequent words |
| Vocab Coverage | Cumulative coverage curve |
| Embedding Isotropy | Vector space uniformity |
| Embedding Norms | Vector magnitude distribution |
| Embedding Similarity | Word similarity heatmap |
| Nearest Neighbors | Similar words for key terms |
| t-SNE Words | 2D word embedding visualization |
| t-SNE Sentences | 2D sentence embedding visualization |
| Position Encoding | Encoding method comparison |
| Model Sizes | Storage requirements |
| Performance Dashboard | Comprehensive performance overview |
About This Project
Data Source
Models trained on wikipedia-monthly - a monthly snapshot of Wikipedia articles across 300+ languages.
Project
A project by Wikilangs - Open-source NLP models for every Wikipedia language.
Maintainer
Citation
If you use these models in your research, please cite:
@misc{wikilangs2025,
author = {Kamali, Omar},
title = {Wikilangs: Open NLP Models for Wikipedia Languages},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.5281/zenodo.18073153},
publisher = {Zenodo},
url = {https://huggingface.co/wikilangs}
institution = {Omneity Labs}
}
License
MIT License - Free for academic and commercial use.
Links
- π Website: wikilangs.org
- π€ Models: huggingface.co/wikilangs
- π Data: wikipedia-monthly
- π€ Author: Omar Kamali
- π€ Sponsor: Featherless AI
Generated by Wikilangs Models Pipeline
Report Date: 2026-01-10 17:45:35



















