Zeelandic - Wikilangs Models
Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study
This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on Zeelandic 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 | 3.358x | 3.36 | 0.1058% | 433,648 |
| 16k | 3.668x | 3.67 | 0.1156% | 397,034 |
| 32k | 3.937x | 3.94 | 0.1241% | 369,853 |
| 64k | 4.195x π | 4.20 | 0.1322% | 347,155 |
Tokenization Examples
Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size:
Sample 1: 12 juni is d'n 163e of 164e dag (bie een schrikkeljaer) van 't jaer.
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | β 1 2 βjuni βis βd ' n β 1 ... (+20 more) |
30 |
| 16k | β 1 2 βjuni βis βd ' n β 1 ... (+20 more) |
30 |
| 32k | β 1 2 βjuni βis βd ' n β 1 ... (+20 more) |
30 |
| 64k | β 1 2 βjuni βis βd ' n β 1 ... (+20 more) |
30 |
Sample 2: is 'n jaer. Gebeurtenisse 5 juni - Op last van de Franse keizer Napoleon wor de ...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | βis β' n βjaer . βgebeurtenisse β 5 βjuni β- ... (+22 more) |
32 |
| 16k | βis β' n βjaer . βgebeurtenisse β 5 βjuni β- ... (+20 more) |
30 |
| 32k | βis β' n βjaer . βgebeurtenisse β 5 βjuni β- ... (+20 more) |
30 |
| 64k | βis β' n βjaer . βgebeurtenisse β 5 βjuni β- ... (+18 more) |
28 |
Sample 3: Sri Lanka is 'n land in AziΓ«, d'n 'oΓ΄dstad is Sri Jayewardenapura Kotte. GroΓ΄ste...
| Vocab | Tokens | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 8k | βsri βlanka βis β' n βland βin βaziΓ« , βd ... (+35 more) |
45 |
| 16k | βsri βlanka βis β' n βland βin βaziΓ« , βd ... (+33 more) |
43 |
| 32k | βsri βlanka βis β' n βland βin βaziΓ« , βd ... (+29 more) |
39 |
| 64k | βsri βlanka βis β' n βland βin βaziΓ« , βd ... (+26 more) |
36 |
Key Findings
- Best Compression: 64k achieves 4.195x compression
- Lowest UNK Rate: 8k with 0.1058% 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 | 2,743 | 11.42 | 15,853 | 37.5% | 62.2% |
| 2-gram | Subword | 285 π | 8.16 | 2,525 | 65.2% | 99.1% |
| 3-gram | Word | 3,421 | 11.74 | 23,993 | 38.7% | 58.8% |
| 3-gram | Subword | 2,246 | 11.13 | 20,884 | 26.9% | 72.1% |
| 4-gram | Word | 6,678 | 12.71 | 47,341 | 34.4% | 50.1% |
| 4-gram | Subword | 10,644 | 13.38 | 102,913 | 14.8% | 45.3% |
| 5-gram | Word | 5,192 | 12.34 | 39,407 | 37.4% | 52.6% |
| 5-gram | Subword | 29,540 | 14.85 | 232,889 | 10.5% | 34.0% |
Top 5 N-grams by Size
2-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | van de |
6,350 |
| 2 | in de |
6,008 |
| 3 | in frankriek |
4,947 |
| 4 | is n |
4,303 |
| 5 | vogges t |
3,505 |
3-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | lienks nae buten |
3,384 |
| 2 | in de rehio |
1,790 |
| 3 | in t departement |
1,769 |
| 4 | is n hemeΓͺnte |
1,766 |
| 5 | n hemeΓͺnte in |
1,764 |
4-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | is n hemeΓͺnte in |
1,762 |
| 2 | n hemeΓͺnte in t |
1,755 |
| 3 | t bureau van de |
1,754 |
| 4 | de statistiek n in |
1,754 |
| 5 | van de statistiek n |
1,754 |
5-grams (Word):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | is n hemeΓͺnte in t |
1,755 |
| 2 | t bureau van de statistiek |
1,754 |
| 3 | van de statistiek n in |
1,754 |
| 4 | bureau van de statistiek n |
1,754 |
| 5 | de statistiek n in frankriek |
1,754 |
2-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | n _ |
164,170 |
| 2 | e _ |
153,880 |
| 3 | e n |
115,339 |
| 4 | e r |
100,491 |
| 5 | d e |
89,945 |
3-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | e n _ |
59,274 |
| 2 | _ d e |
53,896 |
| 3 | d e _ |
49,282 |
| 4 | _ i n |
42,462 |
| 5 | i n _ |
36,109 |
4-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | _ d e _ |
41,150 |
| 2 | _ i n _ |
32,453 |
| 3 | _ v a n |
25,691 |
| 4 | v a n _ |
24,842 |
| 5 | n _ d e |
19,736 |
5-grams (Subword):
| Rank | N-gram | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | _ v a n _ |
24,505 |
| 2 | n _ d e _ |
16,103 |
| 3 | a n _ d e |
9,072 |
| 4 | e _ i n _ |
8,231 |
| 5 | v a n _ d |
8,211 |
Key Findings
- Best Perplexity: 2-gram (subword) with 285
- Entropy Trend: Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable)
- Coverage: Top-1000 patterns cover ~34% 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 | 0.7527 | 1.685 | 4.57 | 73,879 | 24.7% |
| 1 | Subword | 1.3603 | 2.567 | 10.32 | 532 | 0.0% |
| 2 | Word | 0.2261 | 1.170 | 1.54 | 337,089 | 77.4% |
| 2 | Subword | 1.0696 | 2.099 | 6.58 | 5,488 | 0.0% |
| 3 | Word | 0.0785 | 1.056 | 1.14 | 515,910 | 92.2% |
| 3 | Subword | 0.9247 | 1.898 | 4.52 | 36,113 | 7.5% |
| 4 | Word | 0.0353 π | 1.025 | 1.06 | 586,459 | 96.5% |
| 4 | Subword | 0.6763 | 1.598 | 2.77 | 163,034 | 32.4% |
Generated Text Samples (Word-based)
Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model:
Context Size 1:
de gift erkent naemelijk hriekenland cyprus lid van begunne james challis aerzelend een autobedrief ...in brussels hewest ok gerekend is de bevolkiengsdichteid bedroe 33 3 w aan ze kwam mn zuster van de jaer gebeurtenisse 18 km bevolkienge in frankriek aod chazemais lei op de
Context Size 2:
van de gilberteilan n phoenixeilan n line eilan n of t angrenzende guatemala maekt anspraek op dein de laete negentiende eΓͺuw in de rehio picardie in frankriek geograofische informaotie artonges le...is n hemeΓͺnte in t departement loire en de vrouwe bin net als aore grote steden in
Context Size 3:
lienks nae buten britannica fact file city population klimaatinfo liggienge links thumb kaerte in zw...in de rehio picardie in frankriek geograofische informaotie barenton cel lei op de coΓΆrdinaot n 49 0...in t departement alpes de haute provence in de rehio auvergne in frankriek geograofische informaotie...
Context Size 4:
is n hemeΓͺnte in t departement aisne in de rehio picardie in frankriek geograofische informaotie la ...n hemeΓͺnte in t departement ain in de rehio rhΓ΄ne alpes in frankriek geograofische informaotie courc...statistiek n in frankriek aod saint julien d asse is n hemeΓͺnte in t departement aisne in de rehio
Generated Text Samples (Subword-based)
Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model:
Context Size 1:
_u)_d_dadier,_eoeridβ_'nt_n_oen,n_a_din_hi_veses
Context Size 2:
n_somant._vortembe_hei_elive-a_preen_ad_eΓͺnt_he_300
Context Size 3:
en_van_de_salmanda_de_vèr)_lieë,_'aode_31,8_mie_andamm
Context Size 4:
_de_botte_world_fac_in_frankriek_meer._van_de_stant_insee
Key Findings
- Best Predictability: Context-4 (word) with 96.5% predictability
- Branching Factor: Decreases with context size (more deterministic)
- Memory Trade-off: Larger contexts require more storage (163,034 contexts)
- Recommendation: Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation
4. Vocabulary Analysis
Statistics
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Vocabulary Size | 32,227 |
| Total Tokens | 787,829 |
| Mean Frequency | 24.45 |
| Median Frequency | 4 |
| Frequency Std Dev | 425.77 |
Most Common Words
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | de | 42,264 |
| 2 | in | 32,757 |
| 3 | n | 30,236 |
| 4 | van | 24,663 |
| 5 | t | 18,522 |
| 6 | en | 15,110 |
| 7 | is | 12,805 |
| 8 | een | 8,217 |
| 9 | op | 7,396 |
| 10 | d | 5,762 |
Least Common Words (from vocabulary)
| Rank | Word | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | groussbus | 2 |
| 2 | saeul | 2 |
| 3 | useldange | 2 |
| 4 | vichten | 2 |
| 5 | kiischpelt | 2 |
| 6 | kommunistische | 2 |
| 7 | zunneverduusterieng | 2 |
| 8 | eclipsewise | 2 |
| 9 | grifformeΓͺrd | 2 |
| 10 | charkov | 2 |
Zipf's Law Analysis
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Zipf Coefficient | 1.0798 |
| RΒ² (Goodness of Fit) | 0.997599 |
| Adherence Quality | excellent |
Coverage Analysis
| Top N Words | Coverage |
|---|---|
| Top 100 | 50.3% |
| Top 1,000 | 74.0% |
| Top 5,000 | 86.6% |
| Top 10,000 | 91.8% |
Key Findings
- Zipf Compliance: RΒ²=0.9976 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law
- High Frequency Dominance: Top 100 words cover 50.3% of corpus
- Long Tail: 22,227 words needed for remaining 8.2% 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 | 0.7531 | 0.3541 | N/A | N/A |
| mono_64d | 64 | 0.4175 | 0.3237 | N/A | N/A |
| mono_128d | 128 | 0.0896 | 0.3307 | N/A | N/A |
| aligned_32d | 32 | 0.7531 π | 0.3585 | 0.0340 | 0.2080 |
| aligned_64d | 64 | 0.4175 | 0.3260 | 0.0620 | 0.2600 |
| aligned_128d | 128 | 0.0896 | 0.3217 | 0.0940 | 0.3260 |
Key Findings
- Best Isotropy: aligned_32d with 0.7531 (more uniform distribution)
- Semantic Density: Average pairwise similarity of 0.3358. 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 | 0.548 | 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 |
bievoegelijke, benediktsson, bommenwΓͺrrepers |
-s |
stortte, stoffels, sovjetpresident |
-a |
aaien, a15, amor |
-e |
eslogen, ergste, eige |
-m |
melanocharis, michigan, mantel |
-be |
benediktsson, bestoot, beleven |
-k |
kassapa, kat, kroatisch |
-d |
du, dong, droizy |
Productive Suffixes
| Suffix | Examples |
|---|---|
-e |
colonne, bievoegelijke, ergste |
-n |
eslogen, aaien, benediktsson |
-en |
eslogen, aaien, lampen |
-s |
melanocharis, bommenwΓͺrrepers, cnemotriccus |
-t |
kat, vaorieert, verdeΓͺlt |
-d |
banjaerd, rehenwoud, eerlijkeid |
-r |
pΓͺr, omar, christopher |
-er |
christopher, onmiskenbaer, creuzier |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
sche |
1.77x | 55 contexts | schep, schei, scheer |
nder |
1.60x | 60 contexts | onder, ander, under |
chte |
1.47x | 82 contexts | achte, echte, zochte |
isch |
1.94x | 27 contexts | visch, episch, typisch |
enge |
1.63x | 50 contexts | engel, ienge, hienge |
eder |
1.77x | 36 contexts | ieder, ceder, reder |
onde |
1.57x | 57 contexts | onden, ondek, konde |
erde |
1.41x | 72 contexts | erder, derde, verde |
ienk |
1.60x | 39 contexts | dienk, lienk, wienk |
emen |
1.44x | 28 contexts | jemen, nemen, remens |
geme |
1.58x | 16 contexts | gemet, gemert, gemeΓͺn |
uten |
1.48x | 18 contexts | futen, outen, buten |
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 |
-n |
105 words | stichtten, speelgelegenheden |
-s |
-e |
104 words | sprake, studie |
-b |
-e |
91 words | biolohische, belgische |
-s |
-en |
87 words | stichtten, speelgelegenheden |
-a |
-e |
84 words | angenome, afrikaanse |
-b |
-n |
83 words | beton, bussen |
-g |
-e |
70 words | grooste, gekoze |
-s |
-s |
70 words | schans, syrrhaptes |
-g |
-n |
66 words | gerben, gerdien |
-k |
-e |
61 words | kiescollege, konienginne |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| biblioteek | bibliot-e-ek |
7.5 | e |
| pannerden | panner-d-en |
7.5 | d |
| castaneus | castan-e-us |
7.5 | e |
| hartennes | harten-n-es |
7.5 | n |
| iengelsman | iengels-m-an |
7.5 | m |
| waoterdunen | waoterdu-n-en |
7.5 | n |
| brandaris | branda-r-is |
7.5 | r |
| ijsselmeer | ijsselm-e-er |
7.5 | e |
| wullemsen | wullem-s-en |
7.5 | s |
| waerneΓͺmer | waerneΓͺ-m-er |
7.5 | m |
| verkennen | verken-n-en |
7.5 | n |
| pΓ’turages | pΓ’tura-ge-s |
7.5 | ge |
| begeerten | be-ge-erten |
7.5 | erten |
| regerienk | re-ge-rienk |
7.5 | rienk |
| rekenieng | reken-ie-ng |
6.0 | reken |
6.6 Linguistic Interpretation
Automated Insight: The language Zeelandic 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 (4.19x) |
| N-gram | 2-gram | Lowest perplexity (285) |
| Markov | Context-4 | Highest predictability (96.5%) |
| 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 05:53:31



















