|
|
--- |
|
|
language: pnt |
|
|
language_name: Pontic |
|
|
language_family: greek |
|
|
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-greek |
|
|
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: 3.670 |
|
|
- name: best_isotropy |
|
|
type: isotropy |
|
|
value: 0.0523 |
|
|
- name: vocabulary_size |
|
|
type: vocab |
|
|
value: 0 |
|
|
generated: 2026-01-10 |
|
|
--- |
|
|
|
|
|
# Pontic - Wikilangs Models |
|
|
## Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study |
|
|
|
|
|
This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on **Pontic** 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** | 3.197x | 3.20 | 0.1329% | 100,820 | |
|
|
| **16k** | 3.540x | 3.55 | 0.1472% | 91,057 | |
|
|
| **32k** | 3.670x ๐ | 3.68 | 0.1526% | 87,822 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Tokenization Examples |
|
|
|
|
|
Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size: |
|
|
|
|
|
**Sample 1:** `ฮ ฮฯฮฌฮบฮฑ ฮตฮฝ ฯฮฟฮปฮนฯฮตฮฏฮฑ ฯฮทฮฝ ฮฮฑฯฯฮฝฮฏฮฑฮฝ. ฮฯฮฎฮผฮตฯฮฟฮฝ ฮตฯ' ฯฮปฮทฮธฯ
ฯฮผฯฮฝ 2.668.586 ฮฑฮฝฮธฯฯฯ.` |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab | Tokens | Count | |
|
|
|-------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 8k | `โฮท โฮฟฯฮฌฮบฮฑ โฮตฮฝ โฯฮฟฮปฮนฯฮตฮฏฮฑ โฯฮทฮฝ โฮนฮฑฯฯฮฝฮฏฮฑฮฝ . โฮฟฯฮฎฮผฮตฯฮฟฮฝ โฮตฯ ' ... (+13 more)` | 23 | |
|
|
| 16k | `โฮท โฮฟฯฮฌฮบฮฑ โฮตฮฝ โฯฮฟฮปฮนฯฮตฮฏฮฑ โฯฮทฮฝ โฮนฮฑฯฯฮฝฮฏฮฑฮฝ . โฮฟฯฮฎฮผฮตฯฮฟฮฝ โฮตฯ ' ... (+13 more)` | 23 | |
|
|
| 32k | `โฮท โฮฟฯฮฌฮบฮฑ โฮตฮฝ โฯฮฟฮปฮนฯฮตฮฏฮฑ โฯฮทฮฝ โฮนฮฑฯฯฮฝฮฏฮฑฮฝ . โฮฟฯฮฎฮผฮตฯฮฟฮฝ โฮตฯ ' ... (+13 more)` | 23 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**Sample 2:** `ฮ ฮฯฮปฮฟฯ ฮตฮฝ ฯฯฮปฮทฮฝ ฯฯฮฑฮฝฮฎ (ฯฯฮฑฮฝฯฯฮตฯฮท ฯฮทฯ ฮฮฑฮณฮฝฮทฯฮฏฮฑฯ ฮฟฯฮปฮทฯ) ฯฮฑฯฮฌ ฯฮทฮฝ ฮธฮฌฮปฮฑฯฯฮฑฮฝ ฮฑฯฮฟ ฮบฮญฮฝ...` |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab | Tokens | Count | |
|
|
|-------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 8k | `โฮฟ โฮฒฯฮปฮฟฯ โฮตฮฝ โฯฯฮปฮทฮฝ โฯฯฮฑฮฝ ฮฎ โ( ฯ ฯฮฑฮฝ ฯฯฮตฯฮท ... (+26 more)` | 36 | |
|
|
| 16k | `โฮฟ โฮฒฯฮปฮฟฯ โฮตฮฝ โฯฯฮปฮทฮฝ โฯฯฮฑฮฝฮฎ โ( ฯฯฮฑฮฝฯฯฮตฯฮท โฯฮทฯ โฮผฮฑฮณฮฝฮทฯฮฏฮฑฯ โฮฟฯฮปฮทฯ ... (+20 more)` | 30 | |
|
|
| 32k | `โฮฟ โฮฒฯฮปฮฟฯ โฮตฮฝ โฯฯฮปฮทฮฝ โฯฯฮฑฮฝฮฎ โ( ฯฯฮฑฮฝฯฯฮตฯฮท โฯฮทฯ โฮผฮฑฮณฮฝฮทฯฮฏฮฑฯ โฮฟฯฮปฮทฯ ... (+20 more)` | 30 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**Sample 3:** `ฮ ฮฮฑ ฮกฮฟฯฮญฮป ฮตฮฝ ฯฮฟฮปฮนฯฮตฮฏฮฑ ฯฮทฮฝ ฮฮฑฮปฮปฮฏฮฑฮฝ. ฮฯฮฎฮผฮตฯฮฟฮฝ ฮตฯ' ฯฮปฮทฮธฯ
ฯฮผฯฮฝ 74.998 ฮฑฮฝฮธฯฯฯ.` |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vocab | Tokens | Count | |
|
|
|-------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 8k | `โฮท โฮปฮฑ โฯ ฮฟฯ ฮญฮป โฮตฮฝ โฯฮฟฮปฮนฯฮตฮฏฮฑ โฯฮทฮฝ โฮณฮฑฮปฮปฮฏฮฑฮฝ . ... (+13 more)` | 23 | |
|
|
| 16k | `โฮท โฮปฮฑ โฯฮฟฯฮญฮป โฮตฮฝ โฯฮฟฮปฮนฯฮตฮฏฮฑ โฯฮทฮฝ โฮณฮฑฮปฮปฮฏฮฑฮฝ . โฮฟฯฮฎฮผฮตฯฮฟฮฝ โฮตฯ ... (+11 more)` | 21 | |
|
|
| 32k | `โฮท โฮปฮฑ โฯฮฟฯฮญฮป โฮตฮฝ โฯฮฟฮปฮนฯฮตฮฏฮฑ โฯฮทฮฝ โฮณฮฑฮปฮปฮฏฮฑฮฝ . โฮฟฯฮฎฮผฮตฯฮฟฮฝ โฮตฯ ... (+11 more)` | 21 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Compression:** 32k achieves 3.670x compression |
|
|
- **Lowest UNK Rate:** 8k with 0.1329% 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 | 378 | 8.56 | 778 | 59.1% | 100.0% | |
|
|
| **2-gram** | Subword | 411 | 8.68 | 1,785 | 57.2% | 97.4% | |
|
|
| **3-gram** | Word | 302 ๐ | 8.24 | 829 | 68.5% | 100.0% | |
|
|
| **3-gram** | Subword | 2,487 | 11.28 | 9,341 | 25.0% | 68.3% | |
|
|
| **4-gram** | Word | 459 | 8.84 | 1,665 | 62.9% | 89.3% | |
|
|
| **4-gram** | Subword | 7,482 | 12.87 | 24,840 | 13.4% | 46.9% | |
|
|
| **5-gram** | Word | 321 | 8.33 | 1,188 | 70.5% | 96.3% | |
|
|
| **5-gram** | Subword | 11,940 | 13.54 | 32,544 | 9.4% | 38.6% | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Top 5 N-grams by Size |
|
|
|
|
|
**2-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `ฯฮท ฯฯฮฟฮฝฮฏฮฑฯ` | 207 | |
|
|
| 2 | `ฮณฮนฮฑ ฮฝฮฑ` | 153 | |
|
|
| 3 | `ฯฮฟ ฮณฯฮทฮณฮฟฯฮนฮฑฮฝฯฮฝ` | 134 | |
|
|
| 4 | `ฮณฯฮทฮณฮฟฯฮนฮฑฮฝฯฮฝ ฮทฮผฮตฯฮฟฮปฯฮณฮนฮฟฮฝ` | 134 | |
|
|
| 5 | `2 3` | 133 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**3-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `ฯฮฟ ฮณฯฮทฮณฮฟฯฮนฮฑฮฝฯฮฝ ฮทฮผฮตฯฮฟฮปฯฮณฮนฮฟฮฝ` | 133 | |
|
|
| 2 | `2 3 4` | 132 | |
|
|
| 3 | `15 16 17` | 131 | |
|
|
| 4 | `17 18 19` | 131 | |
|
|
| 5 | `9 10 11` | 131 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**4-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `25 26 27 28` | 131 | |
|
|
| 2 | `9 10 11 12` | 131 | |
|
|
| 3 | `10 11 12 13` | 131 | |
|
|
| 4 | `3 4 5 6` | 131 | |
|
|
| 5 | `11 12 13 14` | 131 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**5-grams (Word):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `8 9 10 11 12` | 131 | |
|
|
| 2 | `10 11 12 13 14` | 131 | |
|
|
| 3 | `11 12 13 14 15` | 131 | |
|
|
| 4 | `12 13 14 15 16` | 131 | |
|
|
| 5 | `13 14 15 16 17` | 131 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**2-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `ฮฝ _` | 10,498 | |
|
|
| 2 | `_ ฯ` | 7,042 | |
|
|
| 3 | `ฮฑ ฮฝ` | 5,192 | |
|
|
| 4 | `ฮฑ _` | 4,454 | |
|
|
| 5 | `ฯ _` | 4,288 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**3-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `ฮฟ ฮฝ _` | 2,539 | |
|
|
| 2 | `ฮฑ ฮฝ _` | 2,368 | |
|
|
| 3 | `_ ฯ ฮท` | 2,160 | |
|
|
| 4 | `_ ฮบ ฮฑ` | 1,899 | |
|
|
| 5 | `_ ฯ ฮฟ` | 1,888 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**4-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `_ ฯ ฮท _` | 1,677 | |
|
|
| 2 | `_ ฮบ ฮฑ ฮน` | 1,214 | |
|
|
| 3 | `ฮบ ฮฑ ฮน _` | 1,179 | |
|
|
| 4 | `_ ฯ ฮฟ _` | 1,174 | |
|
|
| 5 | `_ ฮต ฮฝ _` | 752 | |
|
|
|
|
|
**5-grams (Subword):** |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | N-gram | Count | |
|
|
|------|--------|-------| |
|
|
| 1 | `_ ฮบ ฮฑ ฮน _` | 1,176 | |
|
|
| 2 | `ฮฝ _ ฯ ฮท _` | 594 | |
|
|
| 3 | `_ ฯ ฯ ฮฟ ฮฝ` | 536 | |
|
|
| 4 | `ฮน ฮบ ฯ ฮฝ _` | 527 | |
|
|
| 5 | `ฯ ฯ ฮฟ ฮฝ ฮฏ` | 523 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Perplexity:** 3-gram (word) with 302 |
|
|
- **Entropy Trend:** Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable) |
|
|
- **Coverage:** Top-1000 patterns cover ~39% of corpus |
|
|
- **Recommendation:** 4-gram or 5-gram for best predictive performance |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
## 3. Markov Chain Evaluation |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
### Results |
|
|
|
|
|
| Context | Variant | Avg Entropy | Perplexity | Branching Factor | Unique Contexts | Predictability | |
|
|
|---------|---------|-------------|------------|------------------|-----------------|----------------| |
|
|
| **1** | Word | 0.4938 | 1.408 | 2.69 | 11,667 | 50.6% | |
|
|
| **1** | Subword | 1.2400 | 2.362 | 8.79 | 439 | 0.0% | |
|
|
| **2** | Word | 0.1458 | 1.106 | 1.25 | 31,022 | 85.4% | |
|
|
| **2** | Subword | 1.0962 | 2.138 | 5.25 | 3,856 | 0.0% | |
|
|
| **3** | Word | 0.0419 | 1.029 | 1.07 | 38,349 | 95.8% | |
|
|
| **3** | Subword | 0.6896 | 1.613 | 2.67 | 20,216 | 31.0% | |
|
|
| **4** | Word | 0.0219 ๐ | 1.015 | 1.04 | 40,551 | 97.8% | |
|
|
| **4** | Subword | 0.3670 | 1.290 | 1.70 | 53,958 | 63.3% | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Generated Text Samples (Word-based) |
|
|
|
|
|
Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model: |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 1:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `ฯฮท ฮณฮฑฮปฮปฮฏฮฑฮฝ ฮฟฯฮฎฮผฮตฯฮฟฮฝ ฮตฯ ฯฮปฮทฮธฯ
ฯฮผฯฮฝ ฯฮท ฮปฮญฮพฮทฮฝ encyclopaedia ฮฑฮญฯฯ ฮฌฮผฮฟฮฝ ฮฝฯฮฟ ฮตฯฮฟฮฏฮบฮฑฮฝ ฯฮฌฯฮฑฮปฮฑ ฮดฮฏฮดฯ
ฮผฮฑ ฯฮฑ commo...` |
|
|
2. `ฯฮฟ ฯฮฟฯฮฌฮผ ฮปฮญฯฮบฮฟฯ
ฮฝฯฮฑฮฝ doฤu karadeniz daฤlarฤฑ ฮฌฮผฮฑ ฮตฯ
ฯฮฏฯฮบฮฟฯ
ฮผฮต ฮบฮฑฮน ฯฮนฮปฯฮปฮฟฮณฮฟฮฝ ฮณฮนฯฯฮฑฮฝ ฮฒฯฮปฯฮณฮบฮฑฮฝฮณฮบ ฮผฯฮญฯฮนฯฯ ฮญฮฒ...` |
|
|
3. `ฮบฮฑฮน ฮฟ ฯฮปฮทฮธฯ
ฯฮผฯฮฝ ฯฮฑ ฮดฯ
ฯฮนฮบฮฌ ฯฮฏฯฯ ฯฮทฮฝ ฯฮฟฮปฯฮฝฮฏฮฑฮฝ ฯฮทฮฝ ฯฯฮผฮทฮฝ ฮตฯฮญฮผฮฝฮตฮฝ ฮญฮฝฮฑฮฝ ฯฯ
ฮฝฮตฯฮณฮฑฯฮฏฮฑฮฝ ฮฝฯฮฟ ฮตฯ
ฯฮฏฮตฯฮฑฮน ฯฮฟ` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 2:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `ฮณฮนฮฑ ฮฝฮฑ ฯฮตฮปฮฟฯฯฮตฮฝ ฮท ฯฯฮฟฮฝฮฏฮฑ 363 ฮทฮผฮญฯฮฑฯ ฮณฮนฮฑ ฮฝฮฑ ฮตฮณฯฮฟฮนฮบฮฌฯฮตฮฝ ฮบฮน ฮตฯฮตฮฏฯ ฮฑฮฟฯฯฮฟ ฮตฮฝ ฯฮฟ ฮณฯฮฌฯฮนฮผฮฟฮฝ ฯฮฟ` |
|
|
2. `ฯฮท ฯฯฮฟฮฝฮฏฮฑฯ ฮฏฯฯฮต ฮปฮตฮตฮน ฮผฮฑฯ ฯฮฟ ฮณฯฮทฮณฮฟฯฮนฮฑฮฝฯฮฝ ฮทฮผฮตฯฮฟฮปฯฮณฮนฮฟฮฝ ฮตฯฮญฮผฮฝฮฑฮฝ ฮฌฮปฮปฮฑ 360 ฮทฮผฮญฯฮฑฯ ฯฮฟ ฮดฮฏฯฮตฮบฯฮฟฮฝ ฯฮท ฯฯฮฟฮฝฮฏฮฑ ฮฑฯ...` |
|
|
3. `ฯฮฟ ฮณฯฮทฮณฮฟฯฮนฮฑฮฝฯฮฝ ฮทฮผฮตฯฮฟฮปฯฮณฮนฮฟฮฝ ฮบฮน ฮตฯ 31 ฮทฮผฮญฯฮฑฯ ฯ ฮฑฮฒฮฟฯฯฮฟฮฝ ฯฮฟ ฮบฯฮฌฯฮฟฯ ฮญฯฮตฮนฯ ฯฯ ฮตฯฮฏฯฮทฮผฮฟฮฝ ฮปฮฑฮปฮฏฮฑฮฝ ฯฮทฮฝ ฮบฮฑฮถฮฑฮบฮนฮบฮฎ...` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 3:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `ฯฮฟ ฮณฯฮทฮณฮฟฯฮนฮฑฮฝฯฮฝ ฮทฮผฮตฯฮฟฮปฯฮณฮนฮฟฮฝ ฮตฯฮญฮผฮฝฮฑฮฝ ฮฌฮปฮปฮฑ 348 ฮทฮผฮญฯฮฑฯ ฮณฮนฮฑ ฮฝฮฑ ฯฮตฮปฮฟฯฯฮตฮฝ ฮท ฯฯฮฟฮฝฮฏฮฑ ฮฑฯฮฌ ฮฝฯ ฮตฮณฮญฮฝฯฮฑฮฝ ฮตฮณฮตฮฝฮฝฮญฮธฮฑฮฝ...` |
|
|
2. `2 3 4 5 6 u 7 u 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17` |
|
|
3. `21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 28 ฯฯฯ
ฮณฮฟฮผฮทฮฝฮฌ ฮตฮฝ 301ฮฟฮฝ ฮทฮผฮญฯฮฑ ฯฮท ฯฯฮฟฮฝฮฏฮฑฯ` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 4:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28` |
|
|
2. `25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ฮท 1 ฯฮท ฮบฮฑฮปฮฑฮฝฯฮฑฯฮฏ ฮตฮฝ 1ฮฟฮฝ ฮทฮผฮญฯฮฑ ฯฮท ฯฯฮฟฮฝฮฏฮฑฯ ฮฌฮผฮฟฮฝ ฮฝฯฮฟ ฮปฮตฮตฮน` |
|
|
3. `19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ฮท 7 ฯฮท ฮบฮฑฮปฮฑฮฝฯฮฑฯฮฏ ฮตฮฝ 7ฮฟฮฝ` |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Generated Text Samples (Subword-based) |
|
|
|
|
|
Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model: |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 1:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `_ฯ'_25_ฯฮฟฮบ_ฯฮฏฮฑ):` |
|
|
2. `ฮฑฯ
ฮฝ_ฮทฮฝ_ฮฟฯ
ฮผฮฒฮฟฮพฯ
ฯฯ` |
|
|
3. `ฮฝ_ฮท_ฯฮฏฮฑฮน_ฮดฮฑฮนฮฟ_ฮฝฮฑ` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 2:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `ฮฝ_ฮฑฯฮตฯ,_ฮฟ_ฮณฮนฮฑฯฮญฯฮฑ` |
|
|
2. `_ฯฮทฮปฮตฮฏฮฑ_ฮฒฮนฮบฮฟฯ_ฮฑฯ'` |
|
|
3. `ฮฑฮฝ_ฯฮท_ฮผฮฟฯฮฏ_|_4_5_` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 3:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `ฮฟฮฝ_ฮฟ_ฮฌฮปฮปฮฑ_20_21_22` |
|
|
2. `ฮฑฮฝ_ฯฮท_ฮฒฮตฯฮฟฮปฯฮณฮนฮฟฮฝ,_` |
|
|
3. `_ฯฮท_ฮฑฯฮฏฮฑฮฝ_ฮท_ฯฯฯฮฑฯ_` |
|
|
|
|
|
**Context Size 4:** |
|
|
|
|
|
1. `_ฯฮท_ฯฯฮฟฮฝฮฏฮฑฮฝ_ฯฮทฮฝ_ฮบฮฑฮน` |
|
|
2. `_ฮบฮฑฮน_ฮดฮนฮฑฮดฮนฮบฯฯ
ฮฑฮบฮฎฮฝ_ฯ` |
|
|
3. `ฮบฮฑฮน_ฮบฮฌฯฯ_ฮฑฯฯ_ฯฮนฮผฯฯ.` |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Predictability:** Context-4 (word) with 97.8% predictability |
|
|
- **Branching Factor:** Decreases with context size (more deterministic) |
|
|
- **Memory Trade-off:** Larger contexts require more storage (53,958 contexts) |
|
|
- **Recommendation:** Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
|
|
## 4. Vocabulary Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
### Statistics |
|
|
|
|
|
| Metric | Value | |
|
|
|--------|-------| |
|
|
| Vocabulary Size | 3,936 | |
|
|
| Total Tokens | 45,584 | |
|
|
| Mean Frequency | 11.58 | |
|
|
| Median Frequency | 3 | |
|
|
| Frequency Std Dev | 56.78 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Most Common Words |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Word | Frequency | |
|
|
|------|------|-----------| |
|
|
| 1 | ฯฮท | 1,685 | |
|
|
| 2 | ฯฮฟ | 1,240 | |
|
|
| 3 | ฮบฮฑฮน | 1,182 | |
|
|
| 4 | ฮท | 1,115 | |
|
|
| 5 | ฮฟ | 813 | |
|
|
| 6 | ฮตฮฝ | 783 | |
|
|
| 7 | ฯ | 746 | |
|
|
| 8 | ฯฮฑ | 652 | |
|
|
| 9 | ฯฮฑ | 572 | |
|
|
| 10 | ฯฮฟ | 475 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Least Common Words (from vocabulary) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Word | Frequency | |
|
|
|------|------|-----------| |
|
|
| 1 | ฮผฯฮฑฯฮฌฮฝ | 2 | |
|
|
| 2 | ฮตฯฮฌฯฮทฯฮตฮฝ | 2 | |
|
|
| 3 | ฯ
ฯฯฮบฮทฮฝ | 2 | |
|
|
| 4 | ฯฯฮฑฮณฯฮดฯฯ | 2 | |
|
|
| 5 | ฯฯฯฯฯฯฮฑ | 2 | |
|
|
| 6 | ฮผฮฟฯฮถฮนฮบฮฑฯ | 2 | |
|
|
| 7 | born | 2 | |
|
|
| 8 | rolling | 2 | |
|
|
| 9 | stone | 2 | |
|
|
| 10 | ฮดฮตฮฏฯฮฝ | 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Zipf's Law Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
| Metric | Value | |
|
|
|--------|-------| |
|
|
| Zipf Coefficient | 0.9722 | |
|
|
| Rยฒ (Goodness of Fit) | 0.971817 | |
|
|
| Adherence Quality | **excellent** | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Coverage Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
| Top N Words | Coverage | |
|
|
|-------------|----------| |
|
|
| Top 100 | 54.0% | |
|
|
| Top 1,000 | 83.1% | |
|
|
| Top 5,000 | 0.0% | |
|
|
| Top 10,000 | 0.0% | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Zipf Compliance:** Rยฒ=0.9718 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law |
|
|
- **High Frequency Dominance:** Top 100 words cover 54.0% of corpus |
|
|
- **Long Tail:** -6,064 words needed for remaining 100.0% 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 | 0.0523 | 0.6492 | N/A | N/A | |
|
|
| **mono_64d** | 64 | 0.0087 | 0.6629 | N/A | N/A | |
|
|
| **mono_128d** | 128 | 0.0013 | 0.6851 | N/A | N/A | |
|
|
| **aligned_32d** | 32 | 0.0523 ๐ | 0.6519 | 0.0429 | 0.3286 | |
|
|
| **aligned_64d** | 64 | 0.0087 | 0.6348 | 0.0357 | 0.3571 | |
|
|
| **aligned_128d** | 128 | 0.0013 | 0.6853 | 0.0500 | 0.4143 | |
|
|
|
|
|
### Key Findings |
|
|
|
|
|
- **Best Isotropy:** aligned_32d with 0.0523 (more uniform distribution) |
|
|
- **Semantic Density:** Average pairwise similarity of 0.6615. 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 | **1.493** | 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 | |
|
|
|--------|----------| |
|
|
| `-ฮต` | ฮตฯฮบฯฮฑฯฮฟ, ฮตฮณฮบฯ
ฮบฮปฮฟฯฮฑฮฏฮดฮตฮนฮฑ, ฮตฯฮฑฮนฯฮฏฮฑ | |
|
|
| `-ฮฑ` | ฮฑฮปฮฒฮฑฮฝฮฏฮฑฯ, ฮฑฯฯฮทฮณฮฟฮฏ, ฮฑฯฯฮฑฮฏฮฑ | |
|
|
| `-ฮบ` | ฮบฯฮบฮบฮนฮฝฮฟฮฝ, ฮบฮฟฯฮผฮนฮบฮฟฮฏ, ฮบฮฑฮปฮฑฯฯฮตฯ | |
|
|
| `-ฯ` | ฯฯฯฯฮฟฮฝ, ฯฮตฯฯฮนฮบฯฮฝ, ฯฯฮฟฮพฮตฮฝฮตฮฏฮฟฮฝ | |
|
|
| `-ฯ` | ฯฯ
ฯฯฮญฮผฮฑฯฮฑ, ฯฮฌฮฒฮฒฮฑฯฮฟฮฝ, ฯฯ
ฮณฮบฮตฮบฯฮนฮผฮญฮฝฮฑ | |
|
|
| `-ฮบฮฑ` | ฮบฮฑฮปฮฑฯฯฮตฯ, ฮบฮฑฯฮฌฮปฮทฮพฮท, ฮบฮฑฮถฮฏฮฝฮฟ | |
|
|
| `-ฯฮฑ` | ฯฮฑฯฮฌฮดฮตฯ, ฯฮฑฯฮญฯฮฑ, ฯฮฑฯฮฌฮดฮตฮนฮณฮผฮฑ | |
|
|
| `-ฮตฯ` | ฮตฯฮนฯฯฮฟฯฮฎ, ฮตฯฮฟฮฏฮฝ, ฮตฯฮฏฯฮทฯ | |
|
|
|
|
|
#### Productive Suffixes |
|
|
| Suffix | Examples | |
|
|
|--------|----------| |
|
|
| `-ฮฝ` | ฮฟฯฮฟฮฏฮฟฮฝ, ฮญฯฯฮตฮฝ, ฯฮนฯฮฌฮฝฯฮฝ | |
|
|
| `-ฯ` | ฯฮตฯฯฯฮฝฮทฯฮฟฯ, ฮฑฮปฮฒฮฑฮฝฮฏฮฑฯ, ฮปฮญฮพฮตฮนฯ | |
|
|
| `-ฮฑฮฝ` | ฯฯฮผฮฑฮฝฮฏฮฑฮฝ, ฮฏฮฑฮฝ, ฮผฮฌฮฝฮฑฮฝ | |
|
|
| `-ฮฑ` | ฯฯ
ฯฯฮญฮผฮฑฯฮฑ, ฯฯฮผฮฑฮฏฮนฮบฮฑ, ฮตฮณฮบฯ
ฮบฮปฮฟฯฮฑฮฏฮดฮตฮนฮฑ | |
|
|
| `-ฮฟฮฝ` | ฮฟฯฮฟฮฏฮฟฮฝ, ฮบฯฮบฮบฮนฮฝฮฟฮฝ, ฯฯฯฯฮฟฮฝ | |
|
|
| `-ฮฑฯ` | ฮฑฮปฮฒฮฑฮฝฮฏฮฑฯ, ฮตฯฮณฮฑฯฮฏฮฑฯ, ฮณฮฑฮปฮปฮฏฮฑฯ | |
|
|
| `-ฯฮฝ` | ฯฮตฯฯฮนฮบฯฮฝ, ฯฮบฮฑฮฝฮดฮนฮฝฮฑฮฒฮนฮบฯฮฝ, ฮตฮธฮฝฮนฮบฯฮฝ | |
|
|
| `-ฮฟฯ` | ฯฮตฯฯฯฮฝฮทฯฮฟฯ, ฯฮญฮปฮฟฯ, ฮผฯฯฮฟฯ | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 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 | |
|
|
|------|----------|------------------|----------| |
|
|
| `ฮนฮบฯฮฝ` | 1.32x | 17 contexts | ฯ
ฮปฮนฮบฯฮฝ, ฮตฮนฮบฯฮฝฮฑ, ฮตฮฝฮนฮบฯฮฝ | |
|
|
| `ฮผฮฑฯฮฑ` | 1.41x | 10 contexts | ฮธฮญฮผฮฑฯฮฑ, ฮฒฮฎฮผฮฑฯฮฑ, ฯฮฎฮผฮฑฯฮฑ | |
|
|
| `ฮตฯฮฑฮน` | 1.37x | 5 contexts | ฯฮญฮตฯฮฑฮน, ฮฏฮฝฮตฯฮฑฮน, ฮปฯฮตฯฮฑฮน | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 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 | |
|
|
|--------|--------|-----------|----------| |
|
|
| `-ฮต` | `-ฮฝ` | 127 words | ฮตฯฮฟฮฏฮฝ, ฮตฮณฮตฮฝฮฝฮญฮธฮฑฮฝ | |
|
|
| `-ฮฑ` | `-ฮฝ` | 79 words | ฮฑฮฝ, ฮฑฯฮฏฮฑฮฝ | |
|
|
| `-ฯ` | `-ฮฝ` | 65 words | ฯฯฯฯฮฟฮฝ, ฯฮตฯฯฮนฮบฯฮฝ | |
|
|
| `-ฮฑ` | `-ฯ` | 60 words | ฮฑฮปฮฒฮฑฮฝฮฏฮฑฯ, ฮฑฯฮฟฯ
ฮปฮฎฯ | |
|
|
| `-ฮบ` | `-ฮฝ` | 56 words | ฮบฯฮบฮบฮนฮฝฮฟฮฝ, ฮบฯฯฮฟฮฝ | |
|
|
| `-ฮต` | `-ฮตฮฝ` | 54 words | ฮตฮดฮญฮฒฮตฮฝ, ฮตฯฯฮฌฯฮตฮฝ | |
|
|
| `-ฯ` | `-ฮฝ` | 49 words | ฯฮฌฮฒฮฒฮฑฯฮฟฮฝ, ฯฮบฮฑฮฝฮดฮนฮฝฮฑฮฒฮนฮบฯฮฝ | |
|
|
| `-ฯ` | `-ฯ` | 44 words | ฯฮฟฮดฮฟฯฯฮฑฮนฯฮนฯฯฮฎฯ, ฯฮฑฯฮฌฮดฮตฯ | |
|
|
| `-ฮบ` | `-ฯ` | 41 words | ฮบฮฑฯฮฑฮผฮฑฮฝฮปฮฎฯ, ฮบฮตฯฯฯ | |
|
|
| `-ฮต` | `-ฮฑฮฝ` | 40 words | ฮตฮณฮตฮฝฮฝฮญฮธฮฑฮฝ, ฮตฯฮทฯฮตฮฌฯฯฮฑฮฝ | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 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 | |
|
|
|------|-----------------|------------|------| |
|
|
| ฮณฯฮฌฯฮนฮผฮฑฯฮฑ | **`ฮณฯฮฌฯฮนฮผ-ฮฑ-ฯฮฑ`** | 7.5 | `ฮฑ` | |
|
|
| ฮตฯฮฟฮฏฮบฮตฮฝฮฑฯฮฑ | **`ฮตฯฮฟฮฏฮบฮตฮฝ-ฮฑ-ฯฮฑ`** | 7.5 | `ฮฑ` | |
|
|
| ฮปฮนฮธฮฟฯ
ฮฑฮฝฮฏฮฑ | **`ฮปฮนฮธฮฟฯ
-ฮฑฮฝ-ฮฏฮฑ`** | 7.5 | `ฮฑฮฝ` | |
|
|
| ฮฑฮฝฮธฯฯฯฮฟฯ
ฯ | **`ฮฑฮฝฮธฯฯฯ-ฮฟฯ
-ฯ`** | 6.0 | `ฮฑฮฝฮธฯฯฯ` | |
|
|
| ฮบฮฑฮปฮฑฮฝฯฮฌฯฯฯ | **`ฮบฮฑฮปฮฑฮฝฯฮฌฯฯ-ฯ`** | 4.5 | `ฮบฮฑฮปฮฑฮฝฯฮฌฯฯ` | |
|
|
| ฮฒฮนฮฟฮณฯฮฑฯฮนฮบฯฮฝ | **`ฮฒฮนฮฟฮณฯฮฑฯฮนฮบฯ-ฮฝ`** | 4.5 | `ฮฒฮนฮฟฮณฯฮฑฯฮนฮบฯ` | |
|
|
| ฯ
ฯฮฟฮปฮฟฮณฮนฯฯฮฎฮฝ | **`ฯ
ฯฮฟฮปฮฟฮณฮนฯฯฮฎ-ฮฝ`** | 4.5 | `ฯ
ฯฮฟฮปฮฟฮณฮนฯฯฮฎ` | |
|
|
| ฯฮทฮผฮฑฮฝฯฮนฮบฯฮฝ | **`ฯฮทฮผฮฑฮฝฯฮนฮบฯ-ฮฝ`** | 4.5 | `ฯฮทฮผฮฑฮฝฯฮนฮบฯ` | |
|
|
| ฮบฮฑฮปฮฟฮผฮทฮฝฮฌฯ | **`ฮบฮฑฮปฮฟฮผฮทฮฝฮฌ-ฯ`** | 4.5 | `ฮบฮฑฮปฮฟฮผฮทฮฝฮฌ` | |
|
|
| ฮพฮตฯฯฯฮนฯฯฯฮฝ | **`ฮพฮตฯฯฯฮนฯฯฯ-ฮฝ`** | 4.5 | `ฮพฮตฯฯฯฮนฯฯฯ` | |
|
|
| ฯฮตฯฮนฮฟฮดฮนฮบฯฮฝ | **`ฯฮตฯฮนฮฟฮดฮนฮบฯ-ฮฝ`** | 4.5 | `ฯฮตฯฮนฮฟฮดฮนฮบฯ` | |
|
|
| ฮธฮตฯฯฮฑฮปฮฟฮฝฮฏฮบฮทฯ | **`ฮธฮตฯฯฮฑฮปฮฟฮฝฮฏฮบฮท-ฯ`** | 4.5 | `ฮธฮตฯฯฮฑฮปฮฟฮฝฮฏฮบฮท` | |
|
|
| ฮตฯฯฮฏฮฝฮตฯฮตฮฝ | **`ฮตฯฯฮฏฮฝฮตฯฮต-ฮฝ`** | 4.5 | `ฮตฯฯฮฏฮฝฮตฯฮต` | |
|
|
| ฯฯ
ฮฝฮฟฯฮตฯฮฝฮต | **`ฯฯ
ฮฝฮฟฯฮตฯ-ฮฝฮต`** | 4.5 | `ฯฯ
ฮฝฮฟฯฮตฯ` | |
|
|
| ฯฯ
ฮฝฮดฮญฮถฮผฮฑฮน | **`ฯฯ
ฮฝฮดฮญฮถฮผ-ฮฑฮน`** | 4.5 | `ฯฯ
ฮฝฮดฮญฮถฮผ` | |
|
|
|
|
|
### 6.6 Linguistic Interpretation |
|
|
|
|
|
> **Automated Insight:** |
|
|
The language Pontic 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 | **32k BPE** | Best compression (3.67x) | |
|
|
| N-gram | **3-gram** | Lowest perplexity (302) | |
|
|
| Markov | **Context-4** | Highest predictability (97.8%) | |
|
|
| 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 18:08:17* |
|
|
|