--- language: rki language_name: Rakhine language_family: tibetoburman_burmese 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-tibetoburman_burmese 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: 4.868 - name: best_isotropy type: isotropy value: 0.8300 - name: vocabulary_size type: vocab value: 0 generated: 2026-01-10 --- # Rakhine - Wikilangs Models ## Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on **Rakhine** Wikipedia data. We analyze tokenizers, n-gram models, Markov chains, vocabulary statistics, and word embeddings. ## 📋 Repository Contents ### Models & Assets - Tokenizers (8k, 16k, 32k, 64k) - N-gram models (2, 3, 4, 5-gram) - Markov chains (context of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5) - Subword N-gram and Markov chains - Embeddings in various sizes and dimensions (aligned and unaligned) - Language Vocabulary - Language Statistics ![Performance Dashboard](visualizations/performance_dashboard.png) ### 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 ![Tokenizer Compression](visualizations/tokenizer_compression.png) ![Tokenizer Fertility](visualizations/tokenizer_fertility.png) ![Tokenizer OOV](visualizations/tokenizer_oov.png) ![Total Tokens](visualizations/tokenizer_total_tokens.png) ### Results | Vocab Size | Compression | Avg Token Len | UNK Rate | Total Tokens | |------------|-------------|---------------|----------|--------------| | **8k** | 3.940x | 3.94 | 0.1358% | 871,776 | | **16k** | 4.360x | 4.36 | 0.1503% | 787,889 | | **32k** | 4.558x | 4.56 | 0.1571% | 753,628 | | **64k** | 4.868x 🏆 | 4.87 | 0.1678% | 705,565 | ### Tokenization Examples Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size: **Sample 1:** `နို့လက်ဖက်ရည် (အင်္ဂလိပ်: milk tea) ရေ လက်ဖက်ရည်နန့် နွားနို့နန့် ပြုလုပ်ထားရေ ဖ...` | Vocab | Tokens | Count | |-------|--------|-------| | 8k | `▁နို့ လက် ဖက်ရည် ▁( အင်္ဂလိပ် : ▁m il k ▁t ... (+16 more)` | 26 | | 16k | `▁နို့ လက်ဖက်ရည် ▁( အင်္ဂလိပ် : ▁m il k ▁t e ... (+12 more)` | 22 | | 32k | `▁နို့လက်ဖက်ရည် ▁( အင်္ဂလိပ် : ▁m il k ▁t e a ... (+10 more)` | 20 | | 64k | `▁နို့လက်ဖက်ရည် ▁( အင်္ဂလိပ် : ▁milk ▁tea ) ▁ရေ ▁လက်ဖက်ရည်နန့် ▁နွားနို့နန့် ... (+3 more)` | 13 | **Sample 2:** `ပုလဲနို့လက်ဖက်ရည် (တရုတ်: 珍珠奶茶) ဆိုရေမှာ ထိုင်ဝမ်တွင် လူကြိုက်များရေ လက်ဖက်ရည်အအ...` | Vocab | Tokens | Count | |-------|--------|-------| | 8k | `▁ပုလဲ နို့ လက် ဖက်ရည် ▁( တရုတ် : ▁ 珍珠奶茶 ) ... (+20 more)` | 30 | | 16k | `▁ပုလဲ နို့ လက်ဖက်ရည် ▁( တရုတ် : ▁ 珍珠奶茶 ) ▁ဆိုရေမှာ ... (+14 more)` | 24 | | 32k | `▁ပုလဲ နို့လက်ဖက်ရည် ▁( တရုတ် : ▁ 珍珠奶茶 ) ▁ဆိုရေမှာ ▁ထိုင်ဝ ... (+11 more)` | 21 | | 64k | `▁ပုလဲ နို့လက်ဖက်ရည် ▁( တရုတ် : ▁ 珍珠奶茶 ) ▁ဆိုရေမှာ ▁ထိုင်ဝမ်တွင် ... (+7 more)` | 17 | **Sample 3:** `ကိုယ်ရေးအကျဉ်း အလုပ်အကိုင် ဂီတလမ်းကြောင်း အယ်လ်ဘမ်တိ Single သီချင်းတိ ပါဝင်သီဆို...` | Vocab | Tokens | Count | |-------|--------|-------| | 8k | `▁ကိုယ်ရေးအကျဉ်း ▁အလုပ်အကိုင် ▁ဂီတ လမ်းကြောင်း ▁အယ်လ် ဘမ်တိ ▁s ing le ▁သီချင်းတိ ... (+9 more)` | 19 | | 16k | `▁ကိုယ်ရေးအကျဉ်း ▁အလုပ်အကိုင် ▁ဂီတလမ်းကြောင်း ▁အယ်လ်ဘမ်တိ ▁single ▁သီချင်းတိ ▁ပါဝင်သီဆိုဖူးရေ ▁သီချင်းတိ ▁ကိုးကား ▁ပြင်ပလင့် ... (+2 more)` | 12 | | 32k | `▁ကိုယ်ရေးအကျဉ်း ▁အလုပ်အကိုင် ▁ဂီတလမ်းကြောင်း ▁အယ်လ်ဘမ်တိ ▁single ▁သီချင်းတိ ▁ပါဝင်သီဆိုဖူးရေ ▁သီချင်းတိ ▁ကိုးကား ▁ပြင်ပလင့် ... (+1 more)` | 11 | | 64k | `▁ကိုယ်ရေးအကျဉ်း ▁အလုပ်အကိုင် ▁ဂီတလမ်းကြောင်း ▁အယ်လ်ဘမ်တိ ▁single ▁သီချင်းတိ ▁ပါဝင်သီဆိုဖူးရေ ▁သီချင်းတိ ▁ကိုးကား ▁ပြင်ပလင့် ... (+1 more)` | 11 | ### Key Findings - **Best Compression:** 64k achieves 4.868x compression - **Lowest UNK Rate:** 8k with 0.1358% 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 ![N-gram Perplexity](visualizations/ngram_perplexity.png) ![N-gram Unique](visualizations/ngram_unique.png) ![N-gram Coverage](visualizations/ngram_coverage.png) ### Results | N-gram | Variant | Perplexity | Entropy | Unique N-grams | Top-100 Coverage | Top-1000 Coverage | |--------|---------|------------|---------|----------------|------------------|-------------------| | **2-gram** | Word | 2,475 | 11.27 | 3,711 | 18.7% | 59.1% | | **2-gram** | Subword | 1,997 🏆 | 10.96 | 21,097 | 35.0% | 70.8% | | **3-gram** | Word | 3,510 | 11.78 | 5,274 | 15.1% | 51.1% | | **3-gram** | Subword | 16,910 | 14.05 | 105,452 | 13.3% | 36.3% | | **4-gram** | Word | 13,278 | 13.70 | 18,246 | 8.0% | 25.9% | | **4-gram** | Subword | 74,444 | 16.18 | 313,099 | 6.3% | 19.3% | | **5-gram** | Word | 12,446 | 13.60 | 16,164 | 7.7% | 25.0% | | **5-gram** | Subword | 151,855 | 17.21 | 428,759 | 3.6% | 12.6% | ### Top 5 N-grams by Size **2-grams (Word):** | Rank | N-gram | Count | |------|--------|-------| | 1 | `တွီးတောမှု သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ` | 226 | | 2 | `ဒုက္ကဋ်အာပတ် သင့်` | 225 | | 3 | `ပါရာဇိကအာပတ် သင့်ဧ့` | 217 | | 4 | `ပ ရဟန်း` | 216 | | 5 | `အယင်ခေါက်ကခါ ရဟန်းတစ်ပါးစွာ` | 203 | **3-grams (Word):** | Rank | N-gram | Count | |------|--------|-------| | 1 | `ထိုရဟန်းအား တွီးတောမှု သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ` | 178 | | 2 | `သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့ ပ` | 172 | | 3 | `တွီးတောမှု သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့` | 144 | | 4 | `ဖြစ်ဧ့ ပ ရဟန်း` | 142 | | 5 | `မဟုတ်မမှန် ပြောဆိုရေ ရဟန်းအား` | 80 | **4-grams (Word):** | Rank | N-gram | Count | |------|--------|-------| | 1 | `တွီးတောမှု သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့ ပ` | 135 | | 2 | `သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့ ပ ရဟန်း` | 128 | | 3 | `ထိုရဟန်းအား တွီးတောမှု သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့` | 113 | | 4 | `သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြိုက်ဧ့ ပ ရဟန်း` | 67 | | 5 | `ရှေးဟောင်းအဆောက်အဦးများ ရှေးဟောင်းသုတေသနနှင့် အမျိုးသားပြတိုက်ဦးစီးဌာန ယဉ်ကျေးမူဝန်ကြီးဌာန` | 66 | **5-grams (Word):** | Rank | N-gram | Count | |------|--------|-------| | 1 | `ထိုရဟန်းအား တွီးတောမှု သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့ ပ` | 110 | | 2 | `တွီးတောမှု သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့ ပ ရဟန်း` | 93 | | 3 | `ကိုးကား မြောက်ဦးဒေသ ရှေးဟောင်းအဆောက်အဦးများ ရှေးဟောင်းသုတေသနနှင့် အမျိုးသားပြတိုက်ဦးစီးဌာန` | 66 | | 4 | `ရှေးဟောင်းအဆောက်အဦးများ ရှေးဟောင်းသုတေသနနှင့် အမျိုးသားပြတိုက်ဦးစီးဌာန ယဉ်ကျေးမူဝန်ကြီးဌာန ပုထိုးတော်တိ` | 66 | | 5 | `မြောက်ဦးဒေသ ရှေးဟောင်းအဆောက်အဦးများ ရှေးဟောင်းသုတေသနနှင့် အမျိုးသားပြတိုက်ဦးစီးဌာန ယဉ်ကျေးမူဝန်ကြီးဌာန` | 66 | **2-grams (Subword):** | Rank | N-gram | Count | |------|--------|-------| | 1 | `င် း` | 70,638 | | 2 | `ာ း` | 65,449 | | 3 | `_ အ` | 56,551 | | 4 | `။ _` | 52,197 | | 5 | `း _` | 50,866 | **3-grams (Subword):** | Rank | N-gram | Count | |------|--------|-------| | 1 | `ရေ ။ _` | 31,071 | | 2 | `ာ င် း` | 18,078 | | 3 | `တွ င် _` | 14,734 | | 4 | `န န့် _` | 14,037 | | 5 | `ာ း _` | 12,271 | **4-grams (Subword):** | Rank | N-gram | Count | |------|--------|-------| | 1 | `လ ည် း _` | 6,741 | | 2 | `ရ ဟ န် း` | 5,765 | | 3 | `ကေ ာ င် း` | 5,150 | | 4 | `ဖြ စ် ရေ ။` | 4,615 | | 5 | `စ် ရေ ။ _` | 4,465 | **5-grams (Subword):** | Rank | N-gram | Count | |------|--------|-------| | 1 | `ဖြ စ် ရေ ။ _` | 4,438 | | 2 | `_ ရ ဟ န် း` | 3,712 | | 3 | `ပ ါ ရေ ။ _` | 3,105 | | 4 | `က တ် ရေ ။ _` | 2,654 | | 5 | `_ ဖြ စ် ရေ ။` | 2,073 | ### Key Findings - **Best Perplexity:** 2-gram (subword) with 1,997 - **Entropy Trend:** Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable) - **Coverage:** Top-1000 patterns cover ~13% of corpus - **Recommendation:** 4-gram or 5-gram for best predictive performance --- ## 3. Markov Chain Evaluation ![Markov Entropy](visualizations/markov_entropy.png) ![Markov Contexts](visualizations/markov_contexts.png) ![Markov Branching](visualizations/markov_branching.png) ### Results | Context | Variant | Avg Entropy | Perplexity | Branching Factor | Unique Contexts | Predictability | |---------|---------|-------------|------------|------------------|-----------------|----------------| | **1** | Word | 0.2818 | 1.216 | 1.76 | 243,192 | 71.8% | | **1** | Subword | 1.4978 | 2.824 | 24.80 | 2,290 | 0.0% | | **2** | Word | 0.0459 | 1.032 | 1.07 | 427,212 | 95.4% | | **2** | Subword | 0.7632 | 1.697 | 5.15 | 56,790 | 23.7% | | **3** | Word | 0.0165 | 1.012 | 1.02 | 454,829 | 98.3% | | **3** | Subword | 0.4942 | 1.409 | 2.68 | 292,573 | 50.6% | | **4** | Word | 0.0100 🏆 | 1.007 | 1.01 | 463,846 | 99.0% | | **4** | Subword | 0.3219 | 1.250 | 1.80 | 783,810 | 67.8% | ### Generated Text Samples (Word-based) Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model: **Context Size 1:** 1. `နန့် ဝဇီရာကိလာယ vajrakilaya ရို့ပါဝင်လီရေ ဒါကီနီတိ dakini ကောင်းကင်သို့ကြွလှမ်းသူ ရေ ဒေဝိဉာဉ်သဘာဝကနေ...` 2. `ဖြစ်ရေ အာရုံခံကိရိယာတိကို နေ့စဉ်သုံး အရာဝတ္ထုတိတွင် အကန့်အသတ်ဖြင့်သာ အသုံးချနိုင်ရေ ကိုးကား နိုင်ငံတ...` 3. `ရေ ဖိုင်တိကို ဖလှယ်နိုင်ပြီးကေ ဝီမျှရန် ဝှိုက်ဘုတ် ပေါ်တွင်ရီးဆွဲခြင်း ယပိုင်မဟုတ်ကေ ဘောင်နီရာအကျယ်အ...` **Context Size 2:** 1. `တွီးတောမှု သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့ ပ ရဟန်း သင်စွာ ပါရာဇိက ကျယာလို့ မိန့်တော်မှုဧ့ ၁၁၆ ၁၅၆ အယင်ခေါက်ကခါ ...` 2. `ဒုက္ကဋ်အာပတ် သင့် ပ အကြောင်းသုံးမျိုးရို့နန့် မသိစွာကို ငါစွာ သိလည်း သိ မြင်လည်း မြင်ရေဟု ပ အကြောင်း...` 3. `ပါရာဇိကအာပတ် သင့်ဧ့ အချိန်းအချက်လုပ်ခြင်း ဆိုစော် စစောပင်ဖြစ်စီ ညနိန်ချမ်းပင်ဖြစ်စီ ညဉ့်ပင်ဖြစ်စီ နိ...` **Context Size 3:** 1. `ထိုရဟန်းအား တွီးတောမှု သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့ ပ ရဟန်း ပါရာဇိကအာပတ် မသင့် ဒုက္ကဋ်အာပတ် သင့်ဧ့လို့ မိန့်...` 2. `သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့ ပ ရဟန်းရို့ ပါရာဇိကအာပတ် မသင့်လို့ မိန့်တော်မူဧ့ ၆၉ အယင်ခေါက်ကခါ သတ္တရသဝဂ္ဂီရဟန...` 3. `တွီးတောမှု သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့ ပ ရဟန်း သင်စွာ ပါရာဇိက ကျယာလို့ မိန့်တော်မူဧ့ ၆၅ အယင်ခေါက်ကခါ ဝမ်းကြ...` **Context Size 4:** 1. `တွီးတောမှု သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့ ပ ရဟန်း သင်စွာ ပါရာဇိက ကျယာလို့ မိန့်တော်မူဧ့ ၄၆ အယင်ခေါက်ကခါ ရဟန်းတ...` 2. `သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့ ပ ရဟန်း သင်စွာပါရာဇိက ကျယာလို့ မိန့်တော်မူဧ့ ၁၁၅ အယင်ခေါက်ကခါ ရဟန်းတစ်ပါးစွာ မြ...` 3. `ထိုရဟန်းအား တွီးတောမှု သံသယကုက္ကုစ္စ ဖြစ်ဧ့ ပ ရဟန်း သင်စွာ ပါရာဇိက ကျရာလို့ မိန့်တော်မူဧ့ ၈၆ ဝိနီတဝထ...` ### Generated Text Samples (Subword-based) Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model: **Context Size 1:** 1. `_ဆည်းအတွင်ထက်နန့်_အသျှင်ဒို` 2. `းလျှပ်ရို့ဖြစ်ခေါ်ရာင်းကိုအတွဲပ` 3. `ားရေ။_ဇာ_သင့်ရန်ကြီးတိန` **Context Size 2:** 1. `င်းဆောင်း၌_သူဆင်း_ဖြစ်ပြော` 2. `ားရေးနှင့်လှောင်ထူထပ်ကမ်းမှုအ` 3. `_အလာက_ဟဲ့_မိမိကိုယ်_စေတီ_ဒွ` **Context Size 3:** 1. `ရေ။_ကူးစက်တိနန့်_ရွိ့လျားလည်း` 2. `ာင်းကို_တိစွာလဲ။_အမှတ်အသစ်တိ` 3. `တွင်_ရှီးကရက်ဒေါက်တာဆွန်ယက်တိ` **Context Size 4:** 1. `လည်း_နန့်_မျက်နှာလည်း_ကျရုံသာ` 2. `ရဟန်းဘောင်ပေါ်သတင်း_(wave` 3. `ကောင်းလေးမျက်နှာပြင်တစ်ခုဖြစ်၍_` ### Key Findings - **Best Predictability:** Context-4 (word) with 99.0% predictability - **Branching Factor:** Decreases with context size (more deterministic) - **Memory Trade-off:** Larger contexts require more storage (783,810 contexts) - **Recommendation:** Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation --- ## 4. Vocabulary Analysis ![Zipf's Law](visualizations/zipf_law.png) ![Top Words](visualizations/top20_words.png) ![Coverage Curve](visualizations/vocab_coverage.png) ### Statistics | Metric | Value | |--------|-------| | Vocabulary Size | 47,832 | | Total Tokens | 309,275 | | Mean Frequency | 6.47 | | Median Frequency | 3 | | Frequency Std Dev | 31.95 | ### Most Common Words | Rank | Word | Frequency | |------|------|-----------| | 1 | နန့် | 2,540 | | 2 | ဖြစ်ရေ | 2,301 | | 3 | ရေ | 2,228 | | 4 | ဟု | 1,547 | | 5 | ပ | 1,498 | | 6 | ကို | 1,222 | | 7 | ခုနှစ် | 1,163 | | 8 | ကိုးကား | 1,147 | | 9 | ၁ | 1,146 | | 10 | ဟိရေ | 1,132 | ### Least Common Words (from vocabulary) | Rank | Word | Frequency | |------|------|-----------| | 1 | ရီကူးစွာပါရာဖြစ်ဖြစ် | 2 | | 2 | asr | 2 | | 3 | mothers | 2 | | 4 | pdp | 2 | | 5 | evans | 2 | | 6 | မြောက်ဦးမြို့မာပင် | 2 | | 7 | ၁၉ရ၃ | 2 | | 8 | ၁၉ရရ | 2 | | 9 | ၁၉၉ရ | 2 | | 10 | စာနယ်ဇင်းအဖွဲ့တွင် | 2 | ### Zipf's Law Analysis | Metric | Value | |--------|-------| | Zipf Coefficient | 0.8062 | | R² (Goodness of Fit) | 0.995656 | | Adherence Quality | **excellent** | ### Coverage Analysis | Top N Words | Coverage | |-------------|----------| | Top 100 | 15.9% | | Top 1,000 | 35.9% | | Top 5,000 | 57.4% | | Top 10,000 | 68.4% | ### Key Findings - **Zipf Compliance:** R²=0.9957 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law - **High Frequency Dominance:** Top 100 words cover 15.9% of corpus - **Long Tail:** 37,832 words needed for remaining 31.6% coverage --- ## 5. Word Embeddings Evaluation ![Embedding Isotropy](visualizations/embedding_isotropy.png) ![Similarity Matrix](visualizations/embedding_similarity.png) ![t-SNE Words](visualizations/tsne_words.png) ![t-SNE Sentences](visualizations/tsne_sentences.png) ### 5.1 Cross-Lingual Alignment ![Alignment Quality](visualizations/embedding_alignment_quality.png) ![Multilingual t-SNE](visualizations/embedding_tsne_multilingual.png) ### 5.2 Model Comparison | Model | Dimension | Isotropy | Semantic Density | Alignment R@1 | Alignment R@10 | |-------|-----------|----------|------------------|---------------|----------------| | **mono_32d** | 32 | 0.8300 🏆 | 0.3077 | N/A | N/A | | **mono_64d** | 64 | 0.7613 | 0.2695 | N/A | N/A | | **mono_128d** | 128 | 0.3041 | 0.2391 | N/A | N/A | | **aligned_32d** | 32 | 0.8300 | 0.3073 | 0.0260 | 0.1900 | | **aligned_64d** | 64 | 0.7613 | 0.2529 | 0.0400 | 0.2280 | | **aligned_128d** | 128 | 0.3041 | 0.2467 | 0.0940 | 0.3080 | ### Key Findings - **Best Isotropy:** mono_32d with 0.8300 (more uniform distribution) - **Semantic Density:** Average pairwise similarity of 0.2705. Lower values indicate better semantic separation. - **Alignment Quality:** Aligned models achieve up to 9.4% 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 | **0.985** | 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 | |--------|----------| | `-အ` | အရှေ့ဘက်တွင်, အမြင့်ဆုံးနီရာမှာ, အဆင်း | | `-မ` | မတွိ့သည်ကို, မိမမာ, မေထုန်အမှုတဲးလို့ | | `-သ` | သီရိဝိဇယဧ, သဗြုတ်သီးကို, သောတာပတ္တိဖိုလ်သို့ | | `-ပ` | ပရိုတင်းဓာတ်, ပြင်ရေ, ပြန်လာရေအခါ | | `-ရ` | ရီဆိုးရီညစ်တိကို, ရာစုသစ်အလင်္ကာ, ရေပီးဝေရီး | | `-က` | ကွန်ယက်ရေ, ကပ်ပနာ, ကွန်ယက်ချိတ်ဆက်မှု | | `-တ` | တောင်း, တနင်္ဂနွေသားဖြစ်လျှင်, တိုင်းရင်းသားလူမျိုး | | `-လ` | လက္ခဏ, လို့ပြောရာ, လူမှုဆက်ဆံရီး | #### Productive Suffixes | Suffix | Examples | |--------|----------| | `-ဧ` | သီရိဝိဇယဧ, နိုင်ငံစာချုပ်ဧ, ရခိုင်အမျိုးသားကောင်စီဧ | | `-က` | ထိုစဉ်အခါက, ရဟန်းရို့က, ယင်းရို့က | | `-s` | indus, forces, patients | | `-e` | amplitude, made, initiative | | `-n` | radiation, chain, transcription | | `-on` | radiation, transcription, sanitation | | `-ရ` | ဥပဒေအရ, လေ့လာမှုတိအရ, ပြောပြချက်အရ | | `-y` | pty, viceroy, complexity | ### 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 | |------|----------|------------------|----------| | `atio` | 2.95x | 11 contexts | ratio, nation, nations | | `tion` | 2.92x | 9 contexts | action, nation, motion | ### 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 | |--------|--------|-----------|----------| | `-အ` | `-ဧ` | 22 words | အမှုန်တိဧ, အုပ်ချုပ်သူရို့ဧ | | `-က` | `-ဧ` | 16 words | ကျယ်ဧ, ကော်မတီဧ | | `-မ` | `-က` | 11 words | မြာဒင်ထက်က, မိဖုရားက | | `-အ` | `-က` | 11 words | အုပ်ချုပ်သူတိက, အာကာသက | | `-မ` | `-ဧ` | 10 words | မည်သည့်ကိန်းနှစ်ခုဧ, မျိုးရိုးဗီဇအင်ဂျင်နီယာဧ | | `-ရ` | `-က` | 8 words | ရသေ့ကြီးက, ရာစုခန့်က | | `-အ` | `-ရ` | 8 words | အနှစ်သာရ, အခြီအနီအရ | | `-သ` | `-ဧ` | 7 words | သဘာဝကိန်းစုဧ, သဘာဝတရားဧ | | `-တ` | `-က` | 7 words | တတိယပဏ္ဏာသက, တောင်အာဖရိက | | `-သ` | `-က` | 6 words | သံသယဟိပါက, သက္က | ### 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 | |------|-----------------|------------|------| | ဟွန်ရှူးကျွန်းဧ | **`ဟွန်ရှူးကျွန်း-ဧ`** | 4.5 | `ဟွန်ရှူးကျွန်း` | | ခက်ခဲပြီး | **`ခ-က-်ခဲပြီး`** | 4.5 | `်ခဲပြီး` | | စေတီတော်ဧ | **`စေတီတော်-ဧ`** | 4.5 | `စေတီတော်` | | တရားကိုကေလေ့ | **`တ-ရ-ားကိုကေလေ့`** | 4.5 | `ားကိုကေလေ့` | | ခရီးထွက်ပြန်ရာ | **`ခ-ရ-ီးထွက်ပြန်ရာ`** | 4.5 | `ီးထွက်ပြန်ရာ` | | ပြည့်နှစ်က | **`ပြည့်နှစ်-က`** | 4.5 | `ပြည့်နှစ်` | | ဘဒ္ဒကမ္ဘာမှ | **`ဘ-ဒ-္ဒကမ္ဘာမှ`** | 3.0 | `္ဒကမ္ဘာမှ` | | နတ်မြစ်ဧ့ | **`န-တ-်မြစ်ဧ့`** | 3.0 | `်မြစ်ဧ့` | | ရင်ကွဲနာနန့် | **`ရ-င-်ကွဲနာနန့်`** | 3.0 | `်ကွဲနာနန့်` | | မလက်ကာအား | **`မ-လက-်ကာအား`** | 3.0 | `်ကာအား` | | နတ်ရုပ်တိ | **`န-တ-်ရုပ်တိ`** | 3.0 | `်ရုပ်တိ` | | အပေါ်သို့ | **`အ-ပ-ေါ်သို့`** | 3.0 | `ေါ်သို့` | | ဆန္ဒပြမှု | **`ဆ-န-္ဒပြမှု`** | 3.0 | `္ဒပြမှု` | | ရဟိသဖြင့် | **`ရ-ဟ-ိသဖြင့်`** | 3.0 | `ိသဖြင့်` | | ထိုနည်းကို | **`ထ-ိုနည်းကို`** | 1.5 | `ိုနည်းကို` | ### 6.6 Linguistic Interpretation > **Automated Insight:** The language Rakhine 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 ![Performance Dashboard](visualizations/performance_dashboard.png) ### Production Recommendations | Component | Recommended | Rationale | |-----------|-------------|-----------| | Tokenizer | **64k BPE** | Best compression (4.87x) | | N-gram | **2-gram** | Lowest perplexity (1,997) | | Markov | **Context-4** | Highest predictability (99.0%) | | Embeddings | **100d** | Balanced semantic capture and isotropy | --- ## Appendix: Metrics Glossary & Interpretation Guide This section provides definitions, intuitions, and guidance for interpreting the metrics used throughout this report. ### Tokenizer Metrics **Compression Ratio** > *Definition:* The ratio of characters to tokens (chars/token). Measures how efficiently the tokenizer represents text. > > *Intuition:* Higher compression means fewer tokens needed to represent the same text, reducing sequence lengths for downstream models. A 3x compression means ~3 characters per token on average. > > *What to seek:* Higher is generally better for efficiency, but extremely high compression may indicate overly aggressive merging that loses morphological information. **Average Token Length (Fertility)** > *Definition:* Mean number of characters per token produced by the tokenizer. > > *Intuition:* Reflects the granularity of tokenization. Longer tokens capture more context but may struggle with rare words; shorter tokens are more flexible but increase sequence length. > > *What to seek:* Balance between 2-5 characters for most languages. Arabic/morphologically-rich languages may benefit from slightly longer tokens. **Unknown Token Rate (OOV Rate)** > *Definition:* Percentage of tokens that map to the unknown/UNK token, indicating words the tokenizer cannot represent. > > *Intuition:* Lower OOV means better vocabulary coverage. High OOV indicates the tokenizer encounters many unseen character sequences. > > *What to seek:* Below 1% is excellent; below 5% is acceptable. BPE tokenizers typically achieve very low OOV due to subword fallback. ### N-gram Model Metrics **Perplexity** > *Definition:* Measures how "surprised" the model is by test data. Mathematically: 2^(cross-entropy). Lower values indicate better prediction. > > *Intuition:* If perplexity is 100, the model is as uncertain as if choosing uniformly among 100 options at each step. A perplexity of 10 means effectively choosing among 10 equally likely options. > > *What to seek:* Lower is better. Perplexity decreases with larger n-grams (more context). Values vary widely by language and corpus size. **Entropy** > *Definition:* Average information content (in bits) needed to encode the next token given the context. Related to perplexity: perplexity = 2^entropy. > > *Intuition:* High entropy means high uncertainty/randomness; low entropy means predictable patterns. Natural language typically has entropy between 1-4 bits per character. > > *What to seek:* Lower entropy indicates more predictable text patterns. Entropy should decrease as n-gram size increases. **Coverage (Top-K)** > *Definition:* Percentage of corpus occurrences explained by the top K most frequent n-grams. > > *Intuition:* High coverage with few patterns indicates repetitive/formulaic text; low coverage suggests diverse vocabulary usage. > > *What to seek:* Depends on use case. For language modeling, moderate coverage (40-60% with top-1000) is typical for natural text. ### Markov Chain Metrics **Average Entropy** > *Definition:* Mean entropy across all contexts, measuring average uncertainty in next-word prediction. > > *Intuition:* Lower entropy means the model is more confident about what comes next. Context-1 has high entropy (many possible next words); Context-4 has low entropy (few likely continuations). > > *What to seek:* Decreasing entropy with larger context sizes. Very low entropy (<0.1) indicates highly deterministic transitions. **Branching Factor** > *Definition:* Average number of unique next tokens observed for each context. > > *Intuition:* High branching = many possible continuations (flexible but uncertain); low branching = few options (predictable but potentially repetitive). > > *What to seek:* Branching factor should decrease with context size. Values near 1.0 indicate nearly deterministic chains. **Predictability** > *Definition:* Derived metric: (1 - normalized_entropy) × 100%. Indicates how deterministic the model's predictions are. > > *Intuition:* 100% predictability means the next word is always certain; 0% means completely random. Real text falls between these extremes. > > *What to seek:* Higher predictability for text generation quality, but too high (>98%) may produce repetitive output. ### Vocabulary & Zipf's Law Metrics **Zipf's Coefficient** > *Definition:* The slope of the log-log plot of word frequency vs. rank. Zipf's law predicts this should be approximately -1. > > *Intuition:* A coefficient near -1 indicates the corpus follows natural language patterns where a few words are very common and most words are rare. > > *What to seek:* Values between -0.8 and -1.2 indicate healthy natural language distribution. Deviations may suggest domain-specific or artificial text. **R² (Coefficient of Determination)** > *Definition:* Measures how well the linear fit explains the frequency-rank relationship. Ranges from 0 to 1. > > *Intuition:* R² near 1.0 means the data closely follows Zipf's law; lower values indicate deviation from expected word frequency patterns. > > *What to seek:* R² > 0.95 is excellent; > 0.99 indicates near-perfect Zipf adherence typical of large natural corpora. **Vocabulary Coverage** > *Definition:* Cumulative percentage of corpus tokens accounted for by the top N words. > > *Intuition:* Shows how concentrated word usage is. If top-100 words cover 50% of text, the corpus relies heavily on common words. > > *What to seek:* Top-100 covering 30-50% is typical. Higher coverage indicates more repetitive text; lower suggests richer vocabulary. ### Word Embedding Metrics **Isotropy** > *Definition:* Measures how uniformly distributed vectors are in the embedding space. Computed as the ratio of minimum to maximum singular values. > > *Intuition:* High isotropy (near 1.0) means vectors spread evenly in all directions; low isotropy means vectors cluster in certain directions, reducing expressiveness. > > *What to seek:* Higher isotropy generally indicates better-quality embeddings. Values > 0.1 are reasonable; > 0.3 is good. Lower-dimensional embeddings tend to have higher isotropy. **Average Norm** > *Definition:* Mean magnitude (L2 norm) of word vectors in the embedding space. > > *Intuition:* Indicates the typical "length" of vectors. Consistent norms suggest stable training; high variance may indicate some words are undertrained. > > *What to seek:* Relatively consistent norms across models. The absolute value matters less than consistency (low std deviation). **Cosine Similarity** > *Definition:* Measures angular similarity between vectors, ranging from -1 (opposite) to 1 (identical direction). > > *Intuition:* Words with similar meanings should have high cosine similarity. This is the standard metric for semantic relatedness in embeddings. > > *What to seek:* Semantically related words should score > 0.5; unrelated words should be near 0. Synonyms often score > 0.7. **t-SNE Visualization** > *Definition:* t-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding - a dimensionality reduction technique that preserves local structure for visualization. > > *Intuition:* Clusters in t-SNE plots indicate groups of semantically related words. Spread indicates vocabulary diversity; tight clusters suggest semantic coherence. > > *What to seek:* Meaningful clusters (e.g., numbers together, verbs together). Avoid over-interpreting distances - t-SNE preserves local, not global, structure. ### General Interpretation Guidelines 1. **Compare within model families:** Metrics are most meaningful when comparing models of the same type (e.g., 8k vs 64k tokenizer). 2. **Consider trade-offs:** Better performance on one metric often comes at the cost of another (e.g., compression vs. OOV rate). 3. **Context matters:** Optimal values depend on downstream tasks. Text generation may prioritize different metrics than classification. 4. **Corpus influence:** All metrics are influenced by corpus characteristics. Wikipedia text differs from social media or literature. 5. **Language-specific patterns:** Morphologically rich languages (like Arabic) may show different optimal ranges than analytic languages. ### Visualizations Index | Visualization | Description | |---------------|-------------| | Tokenizer Compression | Compression ratios by vocabulary size | | Tokenizer Fertility | Average token length by vocabulary | | Tokenizer OOV | Unknown token rates | | Tokenizer Total Tokens | Total tokens by vocabulary | | N-gram Perplexity | Perplexity by n-gram size | | N-gram Entropy | Entropy by n-gram size | | N-gram Coverage | Top pattern coverage | | N-gram Unique | Unique n-gram counts | | Markov Entropy | Entropy by context size | | Markov Branching | Branching factor by context | | Markov Contexts | Unique context counts | | Zipf's Law | Frequency-rank distribution with fit | | Vocab Frequency | Word frequency distribution | | Top 20 Words | Most frequent words | | Vocab Coverage | Cumulative coverage curve | | Embedding Isotropy | Vector space uniformity | | Embedding Norms | Vector magnitude distribution | | Embedding Similarity | Word similarity heatmap | | Nearest Neighbors | Similar words for key terms | | t-SNE Words | 2D word embedding visualization | | t-SNE Sentences | 2D sentence embedding visualization | | Position Encoding | Encoding method comparison | | Model Sizes | Storage requirements | | Performance Dashboard | Comprehensive performance overview | --- ## About This Project ### Data Source Models trained on [wikipedia-monthly](https://huggingface.co/datasets/omarkamali/wikipedia-monthly) - a monthly snapshot of Wikipedia articles across 300+ languages. ### Project A project by **[Wikilangs](https://wikilangs.org)** - Open-source NLP models for every Wikipedia language. ### Maintainer [Omar Kamali](https://omarkamali.com) - [Omneity Labs](https://omneitylabs.com) ### Citation If you use these models in your research, please cite: ```bibtex @misc{wikilangs2025, author = {Kamali, Omar}, title = {Wikilangs: Open NLP Models for Wikipedia Languages}, year = {2025}, doi = {10.5281/zenodo.18073153}, publisher = {Zenodo}, url = {https://huggingface.co/wikilangs} institution = {Omneity Labs} } ``` ### License MIT License - Free for academic and commercial use. ### Links - 🌐 Website: [wikilangs.org](https://wikilangs.org) - 🤗 Models: [huggingface.co/wikilangs](https://huggingface.co/wikilangs) - 📊 Data: [wikipedia-monthly](https://huggingface.co/datasets/omarkamali/wikipedia-monthly) - 👤 Author: [Omar Kamali](https://huggingface.co/omarkamali) - 🤝 Sponsor: [Featherless AI](https://featherless.ai) --- *Generated by Wikilangs Models Pipeline* *Report Date: 2026-01-10 18:35:21*