West Flemish - Wikilangs Models
Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study
This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on West Flemish 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 | 3.334x | 3.34 | 0.0287% | 502,567 |
| 16k | 3.665x | 3.67 | 0.0315% | 457,201 |
| 32k | 3.934x | 3.94 | 0.0338% | 425,860 |
| 64k | 4.163x π | 4.17 | 0.0358% | 402,499 |
Tokenization Examples
Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size:
Sample 1: Achtntwientig is 't getal 28, e nateurlik getal achter zeevnetwientig en voorn n...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | βa chtn tw ientig βis β' t βgetal β 2 ... (+18 more) |
28 |
| 16k | βa chtn tw ientig βis β' t βgetal β 2 ... (+18 more) |
28 |
| 32k | βa chtn twientig βis β' t βgetal β 2 8 ... (+13 more) |
23 |
| 64k | βachtn twientig βis β' t βgetal β 2 8 , ... (+12 more) |
22 |
Sample 2: de volksnoame van de gemΓͺente ΓostrΓ΄zebeke e dΓͺelgemΓͺente van Stoan, zie: RΓ΄zebe...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | βde βvolk sn oame βvan βde βgemΓͺente βΓ΄ostrΓ΄zebeke βe βdΓͺelgemΓͺente ... (+10 more) |
20 |
| 16k | βde βvolk sn oame βvan βde βgemΓͺente βΓ΄ostrΓ΄zebeke βe βdΓͺelgemΓͺente ... (+10 more) |
20 |
| 32k | βde βvolk snoame βvan βde βgemΓͺente βΓ΄ostrΓ΄zebeke βe βdΓͺelgemΓͺente βvan ... (+8 more) |
18 |
| 64k | βde βvolk snoame βvan βde βgemΓͺente βΓ΄ostrΓ΄zebeke βe βdΓͺelgemΓͺente βvan ... (+8 more) |
18 |
Sample 3: Paltoga (Russisch: ΠΠ°Π»ΡΠΎΠ³Π°) is e dorp in Rusland in 't district Vytegorsky (obla...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | βpal t og a β( russisch : β ΠΏ Π° ... (+37 more) |
47 |
| 16k | βpal t og a β( russisch : β ΠΏ Π° ... (+35 more) |
45 |
| 32k | βpal t oga β( russisch : β ΠΏ Π°Π» ΡΠΎ ... (+29 more) |
39 |
| 64k | βpalt oga β( russisch : β ΠΏ Π°Π» ΡΠΎ Π³ ... (+28 more) |
38 |
Key Findings
- Best Compression: 64k achieves 4.163x compression
- Lowest UNK Rate: 8k with 0.0287% 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 | 12,804 | 13.64 | 41,132 | 15.7% | 36.6% |
| 2-gram | Subword | 282 π | 8.14 | 3,241 | 64.7% | 99.2% |
| 3-gram | Word | 27,763 | 14.76 | 51,974 | 7.7% | 22.9% |
| 3-gram | Subword | 2,519 | 11.30 | 27,863 | 25.7% | 68.5% |
| 4-gram | Word | 45,411 | 15.47 | 74,505 | 6.8% | 17.6% |
| 4-gram | Subword | 15,236 | 13.90 | 154,373 | 12.4% | 36.1% |
| 5-gram | Word | 30,248 | 14.88 | 47,265 | 8.2% | 19.7% |
| 5-gram | Subword | 57,965 | 15.82 | 420,619 | 7.2% | 22.1% |
Top 5 N-grams by Size
2-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | van de |
15,489 |
| 2 | in de |
10,285 |
| 3 | in t |
6,874 |
| 4 | van t |
5,995 |
| 5 | en de |
3,723 |
3-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | joar in de |
850 |
| 2 | van t joar |
791 |
| 3 | bouwkundig erfgoed in |
765 |
| 4 | in west vloandern |
742 |
| 5 | t joar is |
714 |
4-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | t joar is t |
693 |
| 2 | eeuwe volgenst de christelikke |
526 |
| 3 | volgenst de christelikke joartellienge |
526 |
| 4 | noa bouwkundig erfgoed in |
354 |
| 5 | t ende van t |
337 |
5-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | eeuwe volgenst de christelikke joartellienge |
526 |
| 2 | t ende van t joar |
304 |
| 3 | volgenst de christelikke joartellienge gebeurtenissn |
292 |
| 4 | lyste van bouwkundig erfgoed in |
251 |
| 5 | toet t ende van t |
250 |
2-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | n _ |
399,169 |
| 2 | e _ |
395,658 |
| 3 | e r |
217,859 |
| 4 | e n |
214,189 |
| 5 | d e |
208,906 |
3-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | _ d e |
123,266 |
| 2 | d e _ |
116,073 |
| 3 | a n _ |
97,189 |
| 4 | e n _ |
96,860 |
| 5 | _ v a |
80,611 |
4-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | _ d e _ |
90,909 |
| 2 | _ v a n |
76,359 |
| 3 | v a n _ |
74,288 |
| 4 | _ i n _ |
52,878 |
| 5 | n _ d e |
48,858 |
5-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | _ v a n _ |
73,086 |
| 2 | n _ d e _ |
39,289 |
| 3 | a n _ d e |
22,613 |
| 4 | v a n _ d |
21,346 |
| 5 | e _ v a n |
19,923 |
Key Findings
- Best Perplexity: 2-gram (subword) with 282
- Entropy Trend: Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable)
- Coverage: Top-1000 patterns cover ~22% 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 | 0.8228 | 1.769 | 5.44 | 158,804 | 17.7% |
| 1 | Subword | 1.2080 | 2.310 | 9.96 | 735 | 0.0% |
| 2 | Word | 0.2583 | 1.196 | 1.64 | 860,998 | 74.2% |
| 2 | Subword | 1.0608 | 2.086 | 6.74 | 7,322 | 0.0% |
| 3 | Word | 0.0895 | 1.064 | 1.15 | 1,409,019 | 91.1% |
| 3 | Subword | 0.9474 | 1.928 | 4.92 | 49,306 | 5.3% |
| 4 | Word | 0.0313 π | 1.022 | 1.05 | 1,616,997 | 96.9% |
| 4 | Subword | 0.7502 | 1.682 | 3.21 | 242,577 | 25.0% |
Generated Text Samples (Word-based)
Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model:
Context Size 1:
de wyk van t nΓ΄ordn gruujn dikkers in kontrast me 3 juli gin Γͺen of mΓͺercelligvan yper wunt en nieuw ryk in de kustvlaktn groene bewegienge wordn ze egliek nie kostin ip t volgn nog 293 noa bouwkundig erfgoed bevern en mΓͺer tyd toen ze van
Context Size 2:
van de verΓͺnigde stoatn busschnin de dertiende Γͺeuwe dus vΓ¨s ipgedolvn gebied o den Γ΄ostkant van de verΓͺnigde stoatn en kanadain t Γ΄ostn an ciney in noamn in en je viel italiΓ« were binn de stad stroomde
Context Size 3:
joar in de 13e of 14e Γͺeuwe en van de 50 000 en 120 000 beschreevn sΓ΄ortn varieernvan t joar geboorn pontormo gabriel fahrenheit gustaaf flamen emiel lauwers bob dylan gestorvn jozef...bouwkundig erfgoed in tiegem in west vloandern t es eignlyk nen ouden arm van den aa t grenst
Context Size 4:
t joar is t 80e joar in de 10e eeuwe volgenst de christelikke joartellienge mmxii is e schrikkeljoar...volgenst de christelikke joartellienge gebeurtenissn 25 april hertog jan zounder vrΓͺes legt an d ips...eeuwe volgenst de christelikke joartellienge gebeurtenissn april 5 de west vlamsche coureur gaston r...
Generated Text Samples (Subword-based)
Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model:
Context Size 1:
_scoe_taz,_we_vee,_scar-ΓͺliΒ²_manndstoone_zogers_
Context Size 2:
n_'t_vroegroudt_ae_priens)_giΓ«_e_serd_ipparem_moste
Context Size 3:
_de_vanasamuele_(>de_piegouwne_refeuan_beken_deel_rede
Context Size 4:
_de_schopinidad_er__van_mandsche_kenmevan_flandn_ip_ne_bu
Key Findings
- Best Predictability: Context-4 (word) with 96.9% predictability
- Branching Factor: Decreases with context size (more deterministic)
- Memory Trade-off: Larger contexts require more storage (242,577 contexts)
- Recommendation: Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation
4. Vocabulary Analysis
Statistics
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Vocabulary Size | 68,458 |
| Total Tokens | 1,735,026 |
| Mean Frequency | 25.34 |
| Median Frequency | 4 |
| Frequency Std Dev | 600.62 |
Most Common Words
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | de | 93,287 |
| 2 | van | 73,544 |
| 3 | in | 53,708 |
| 4 | en | 49,180 |
| 5 | t | 45,426 |
| 6 | e | 21,400 |
| 7 | is | 17,745 |
| 8 | zyn | 16,831 |
| 9 | n | 15,475 |
| 10 | die | 12,301 |
Least Common Words (from vocabulary)
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | myzeqe | 2 |
| 2 | seman | 2 |
| 3 | rumn | 2 |
| 4 | peshkopi | 2 |
| 5 | dibΓ«r | 2 |
| 6 | Π³ΠΎΡΠΎΠ΄Π° | 2 |
| 7 | uytvoernde | 2 |
| 8 | stoatssecretoarisn | 2 |
| 9 | soamnstellinge | 2 |
| 10 | mph | 2 |
Zipf's Law Analysis
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Zipf Coefficient | 1.0178 |
| RΒ² (Goodness of Fit) | 0.998718 |
| Adherence Quality | excellent |
Coverage Analysis
| Top N Words | Coverage |
|---|---|
| Top 100 | 40.8% |
| Top 1,000 | 63.3% |
| Top 5,000 | 79.0% |
| Top 10,000 | 85.3% |
Key Findings
- Zipf Compliance: RΒ²=0.9987 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law
- High Frequency Dominance: Top 100 words cover 40.8% of corpus
- Long Tail: 58,458 words needed for remaining 14.7% 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 | 0.8756 π | 0.3181 | N/A | N/A |
| mono_64d | 64 | 0.8383 | 0.2517 | N/A | N/A |
| mono_128d | 128 | 0.5888 | 0.2007 | N/A | N/A |
| aligned_32d | 32 | 0.8756 | 0.3113 | 0.0840 | 0.3740 |
| aligned_64d | 64 | 0.8383 | 0.2465 | 0.1380 | 0.4500 |
| aligned_128d | 128 | 0.5888 | 0.2020 | 0.2000 | 0.5260 |
Key Findings
- Best Isotropy: mono_32d with 0.8756 (more uniform distribution)
- Semantic Density: Average pairwise similarity of 0.2550. Lower values indicate better semantic separation.
- Alignment Quality: Aligned models achieve up to 20.0% 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 | -0.109 | 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 |
|---|---|
-s |
soΓ΄rtn, schwaben, schick |
-b |
binnstroomde, boliviΓ«, biezelehe |
-a |
arenaria, addington, amazing |
-ge |
gelanceerd, gezeyd, gevoenn |
-o |
oendregienk, ogtepunt, omwald |
-be |
bewaren, bees, bedek |
-k |
kurs, kommiesje, koopman |
-d |
diΓ©, donetsk, darling |
Productive Suffixes
| Suffix | Examples |
|---|---|
-e |
underne, binnstroomde, poginge |
-n |
soΓ΄rtn, fryslΓ’n, hopeweunn |
-s |
zothuus, kurs, cervantes |
-t |
ogtepunt, varlet, capaciteit |
-en |
conservatieven, schwaben, bewaren |
-d |
vervolgd, omwald, tulband |
-ge |
poginge, franstalige, lancerienge |
-r |
elektrotoer, Γͺesteminister, hour |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
enge |
2.33x | 50 contexts | engel, oenger, mengel |
sche |
1.68x | 141 contexts | schee, asche, vasche |
chte |
1.60x | 115 contexts | achte, echte, vichte |
fran |
2.05x | 37 contexts | frank, franz, frang |
schi |
1.77x | 65 contexts | schip, schie, schid |
icht |
1.56x | 114 contexts | richt, licht, vicht |
isch |
1.83x | 51 contexts | ischl, visch, vischn |
hter |
1.94x | 38 contexts | ahter, echter, achter |
nder |
1.41x | 150 contexts | ander, under, onder |
elik |
1.72x | 51 contexts | gelik, tielik, feliks |
oate |
1.77x | 40 contexts | zoate, oater, moate |
erke |
1.54x | 66 contexts | kerke, berke, werke |
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 |
169 words | subklasse, sukerziekte |
-b |
-e |
149 words | bulskampstroate, beschoafde |
-s |
-n |
125 words | skorsenelen, steeΓ«n |
-b |
-n |
114 words | blokkn, behunn |
-k |
-e |
108 words | kunstacademie, kassie |
-m |
-e |
100 words | muuzee, multiple |
-o |
-n |
95 words | oafbusschn, ofebrookn |
-o |
-e |
91 words | ounbevlekte, omriengende |
-d |
-e |
90 words | dagtemprateure, duytstoalige |
-a |
-e |
88 words | adresse, ansluutienge |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| fermenteren | fermenter-e-n |
7.5 | e |
| benoaderd | benoa-de-rd |
7.5 | de |
| bruggelingen | bruggeling-e-n |
7.5 | e |
| romantiek | romanti-e-k |
7.5 | e |
| vruchtvlees | vruchtv-le-es |
7.5 | le |
| treuzelen | treuze-le-n |
7.5 | le |
| vluchters | vlucht-e-rs |
7.5 | e |
| resources | resourc-e-s |
7.5 | e |
| splenters | splent-e-rs |
7.5 | e |
| ipbryngsten | ipbryngst-e-n |
7.5 | e |
| vienkezetters | vienkezett-e-rs |
7.5 | e |
| knobbeltjes | knobbeltj-e-s |
7.5 | e |
| beweegboar | beweegbo-a-r |
7.5 | a |
| schoonhoven | schoonhov-e-n |
7.5 | e |
| donspluumtjes | donspluumtj-e-s |
7.5 | e |
6.6 Linguistic Interpretation
Automated Insight: The language West Flemish 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 (4.16x) |
| N-gram | 2-gram | Lowest perplexity (282) |
| Markov | Context-4 | Highest predictability (96.9%) |
| 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: 2026-01-11 03:19:22



















