Text Generation
fastText
Panjabi
wikilangs
nlp
tokenizer
embeddings
n-gram
markov
wikipedia
feature-extraction
sentence-similarity
tokenization
n-grams
markov-chain
text-mining
babelvec
vocabulous
vocabulary
monolingual
family-indoaryan_central
Instructions to use wikilangs/pa with libraries, inference providers, notebooks, and local apps. Follow these links to get started.
- Libraries
- fastText
How to use wikilangs/pa with fastText:
from huggingface_hub import hf_hub_download import fasttext model = fasttext.load_model(hf_hub_download("wikilangs/pa", "model.bin")) - Notebooks
- Google Colab
- Kaggle
| language: pa | |
| language_name: Punjabi | |
| language_family: indoaryan_central | |
| 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-indoaryan_central | |
| 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: 4.042 | |
| - name: best_isotropy | |
| type: isotropy | |
| value: 0.8342 | |
| - name: vocabulary_size | |
| type: vocab | |
| value: 0 | |
| generated: 2026-01-10 | |
| # Punjabi - Wikilangs Models | |
| ## Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study | |
| This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on **Punjabi** 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 | |
|  | |
| ### 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** | 3.344x | 3.35 | 0.0292% | 637,303 | | |
| | **16k** | 3.646x | 3.65 | 0.0318% | 584,610 | | |
| | **32k** | 3.881x | 3.88 | 0.0339% | 549,074 | | |
| | **64k** | 4.042x 🏆 | 4.04 | 0.0353% | 527,239 | | |
| ### Tokenization Examples | |
| Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size: | |
| **Sample 1:** `ਕਸੂੰਬੜੀ ਭਾਰਤੀ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਦੇ ਫ਼ਤਹਿਗੜ੍ਹ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ਦੇ ਖੇੜਾ ਬਲਾਕ ਦਾ ਇੱਕ ਪਿੰਡ ਹੈ। ਹਵਾਲ...` | |
| | Vocab | Tokens | Count | | |
| |-------|--------|-------| | |
| | 8k | `▁ਕਸ ੂੰ ਬ ੜੀ ▁ਭਾਰਤੀ ▁ਪੰਜਾਬ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਫ਼ਤਹਿਗੜ੍ਹ ▁ਸਾਹਿਬ ▁ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ... (+13 more)` | 23 | | |
| | 16k | `▁ਕਸ ੂੰ ਬੜੀ ▁ਭਾਰਤੀ ▁ਪੰਜਾਬ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਫ਼ਤਹਿਗੜ੍ਹ ▁ਸਾਹਿਬ ▁ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ▁ਦੇ ... (+12 more)` | 22 | | |
| | 32k | `▁ਕਸ ੂੰ ਬੜੀ ▁ਭਾਰਤੀ ▁ਪੰਜਾਬ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਫ਼ਤਹਿਗੜ੍ਹ ▁ਸਾਹਿਬ ▁ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ▁ਦੇ ... (+12 more)` | 22 | | |
| | 64k | `▁ਕਸ ੂੰ ਬੜੀ ▁ਭਾਰਤੀ ▁ਪੰਜਾਬ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਫ਼ਤਹਿਗੜ੍ਹ ▁ਸਾਹਿਬ ▁ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ▁ਦੇ ... (+12 more)` | 22 | | |
| **Sample 2:** `ਚੂੰਗ ਭਾਰਤੀ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਦੇ ਤਰਨਤਾਰਨ ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ਦੇ ਬਲਾਕ ਭਿੱਖੀਵਿੰਡ ਦਾ ਇੱਕ ਪਿੰਡ ਹੈ। ਹਵਾਲੇ ਤਾਰਨ...` | |
| | Vocab | Tokens | Count | | |
| |-------|--------|-------| | |
| | 8k | `▁ਚ ੂੰ ਗ ▁ਭਾਰਤੀ ▁ਪੰਜਾਬ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਤਰਨਤਾਰਨ ▁ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਬਲਾਕ ... (+15 more)` | 25 | | |
| | 16k | `▁ਚ ੂੰ ਗ ▁ਭਾਰਤੀ ▁ਪੰਜਾਬ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਤਰਨਤਾਰਨ ▁ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਬਲਾਕ ... (+13 more)` | 23 | | |
| | 32k | `▁ਚ ੂੰਗ ▁ਭਾਰਤੀ ▁ਪੰਜਾਬ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਤਰਨਤਾਰਨ ▁ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਬਲਾਕ ▁ਭਿੱ ... (+12 more)` | 22 | | |
| | 64k | `▁ਚੂੰਗ ▁ਭਾਰਤੀ ▁ਪੰਜਾਬ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਤਰਨਤਾਰਨ ▁ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਬਲਾਕ ▁ਭਿੱਖੀਵਿੰਡ ▁ਦਾ ... (+9 more)` | 19 | | |
| **Sample 3:** `ਭੇਲ ਭਾਰਤੀ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਦੇ ਜਲੰਧਰ ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ਦੇ ਬਲਾਕ ਆਦਮਪੁਰ ਦਾ ਇੱਕ ਪਿੰਡ ਹੈ। ਹਵਾਲੇ ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ਦੇ...` | |
| | Vocab | Tokens | Count | | |
| |-------|--------|-------| | |
| | 8k | `▁ਭ ੇਲ ▁ਭਾਰਤੀ ▁ਪੰਜਾਬ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਜਲੰਧਰ ▁ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਬਲਾਕ ▁ਆਦ ... (+10 more)` | 20 | | |
| | 16k | `▁ਭ ੇਲ ▁ਭਾਰਤੀ ▁ਪੰਜਾਬ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਜਲੰਧਰ ▁ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਬਲਾਕ ▁ਆਦਮਪੁਰ ... (+9 more)` | 19 | | |
| | 32k | `▁ਭ ੇਲ ▁ਭਾਰਤੀ ▁ਪੰਜਾਬ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਜਲੰਧਰ ▁ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਬਲਾਕ ▁ਆਦਮਪੁਰ ... (+9 more)` | 19 | | |
| | 64k | `▁ਭੇਲ ▁ਭਾਰਤੀ ▁ਪੰਜਾਬ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਜਲੰਧਰ ▁ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ▁ਦੇ ▁ਬਲਾਕ ▁ਆਦਮਪੁਰ ▁ਦਾ ... (+8 more)` | 18 | | |
| ### Key Findings | |
| - **Best Compression:** 64k achieves 4.042x compression | |
| - **Lowest UNK Rate:** 8k with 0.0292% 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 | 65,512 | 16.00 | 395,139 | 9.9% | 25.1% | | |
| | **2-gram** | Subword | 1,824 🏆 | 10.83 | 65,167 | 38.3% | 74.2% | | |
| | **3-gram** | Word | 226,610 | 17.79 | 723,559 | 4.6% | 13.1% | | |
| | **3-gram** | Subword | 17,627 | 14.11 | 426,051 | 16.0% | 37.7% | | |
| | **4-gram** | Word | 595,990 | 19.18 | 1,217,646 | 2.1% | 7.1% | | |
| | **4-gram** | Subword | 101,454 | 16.63 | 1,977,133 | 8.3% | 22.6% | | |
| | **5-gram** | Word | 481,395 | 18.88 | 795,359 | 2.0% | 6.8% | | |
| | **5-gram** | Subword | 336,559 | 18.36 | 3,786,103 | 4.3% | 14.4% | | |
| ### Top 5 N-grams by Size | |
| **2-grams (Word):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ` | 51,096 | | |
| | 2 | `ਗਿਆ ਸੀ` | 36,408 | | |
| | 3 | `ਤੌਰ ਤੇ` | 36,131 | | |
| | 4 | `ਹੈ ਅਤੇ` | 35,656 | | |
| | 5 | `ਕੀਤਾ ਗਿਆ` | 30,014 | | |
| **3-grams (Word):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `ਕੀਤਾ ਗਿਆ ਸੀ` | 16,375 | | |
| | 2 | `ਦੇ ਰੂਪ ਵਿੱਚ` | 11,064 | | |
| | 3 | `ਕਿਹਾ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ` | 9,910 | | |
| | 4 | `ਦੇ ਤੌਰ ਤੇ` | 7,251 | | |
| | 5 | `ਆਮ ਤੌਰ ਤੇ` | 7,156 | | |
| **4-grams (Word):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `ਸਾਲ ਦੀ ਉਮਰ ਵਿੱਚ` | 4,687 | | |
| | 2 | `ਦਾ ਇੱਕ ਪਿੰਡ ਹੈ` | 4,498 | | |
| | 3 | `ਹਵਾਲੇ ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ਦੇ ਪਿੰਡ` | 3,112 | | |
| | 4 | `ਵੀ ਕਿਹਾ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ` | 2,917 | | |
| | 5 | `ਹੈ ਹਵਾਲੇ ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ਦੇ` | 2,408 | | |
| **5-grams (Word):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `ਹੈ ਹਵਾਲੇ ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ਦੇ ਪਿੰਡ` | 2,358 | | |
| | 2 | `ਦਾ ਇੱਕ ਪਿੰਡ ਹੈ ਹਵਾਲੇ` | 2,190 | | |
| | 3 | `ਪਿੰਡ ਹੈ ਹਵਾਲੇ ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ਦੇ` | 1,587 | | |
| | 4 | `ਇੱਕ ਪਿੰਡ ਹੈ ਹਵਾਲੇ ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ` | 1,551 | | |
| | 5 | `ਜੂਨ ਜੁਲਾਈ ਸਤੰਬਰ ਅਕਤੂਬਰ ਦਸੰਬਰ` | 1,224 | | |
| **2-grams (Subword):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `ਰ _` | 970,300 | | |
| | 2 | `_ ਅ` | 824,969 | | |
| | 3 | `, _` | 781,870 | | |
| | 4 | `ਨ _` | 746,764 | | |
| | 5 | `। _` | 733,291 | | |
| **3-grams (Subword):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `_ ਵਿੱ ਚ` | 572,750 | | |
| | 2 | `ਵਿੱ ਚ _` | 533,677 | | |
| | 3 | `_ ਦੇ _` | 530,516 | | |
| | 4 | `ਅ ਤੇ _` | 432,213 | | |
| | 5 | `_ ਅ ਤੇ` | 431,849 | | |
| **4-grams (Subword):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `_ ਵਿੱ ਚ _` | 533,074 | | |
| | 2 | `_ ਅ ਤੇ _` | 431,071 | | |
| | 3 | `_ ਹੈ । _` | 249,093 | | |
| | 4 | `_ ਇੱ ਕ _` | 216,221 | | |
| | 5 | `_ ਲ ਈ _` | 135,834 | | |
| **5-grams (Subword):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `_ ਹ ਨ । _` | 79,400 | | |
| | 2 | `ਦਾ _ ਹੈ । _` | 69,651 | | |
| | 3 | `_ ਕ ਰ ਨ _` | 56,253 | | |
| | 4 | `_ ਉ ਸ ਨੇ _` | 53,553 | | |
| | 5 | `_ ਹੈ । _ ਇ` | 51,650 | | |
| ### Key Findings | |
| - **Best Perplexity:** 2-gram (subword) with 1,824 | |
| - **Entropy Trend:** Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable) | |
| - **Coverage:** Top-1000 patterns cover ~14% 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 | 0.7819 | 1.719 | 8.40 | 605,913 | 21.8% | | |
| | **1** | Subword | 0.7222 | 1.650 | 10.75 | 17,141 | 27.8% | | |
| | **2** | Word | 0.3690 | 1.291 | 2.26 | 5,085,870 | 63.1% | | |
| | **2** | Subword | 0.7395 | 1.670 | 6.01 | 184,279 | 26.0% | | |
| | **3** | Word | 0.1540 | 1.113 | 1.34 | 11,467,166 | 84.6% | | |
| | **3** | Subword | 0.5675 | 1.482 | 3.86 | 1,107,278 | 43.2% | | |
| | **4** | Word | 0.0639 🏆 | 1.045 | 1.11 | 15,379,661 | 93.6% | | |
| | **4** | Subword | 0.4313 | 1.348 | 2.39 | 4,276,620 | 56.9% | | |
| ### Generated Text Samples (Word-based) | |
| Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model: | |
| **Context Size 1:** | |
| 1. `ਵਿੱਚ ਫੁੱਟਾਂ ਦੀ ਵਕਾਲਤ ਵੀ ਹਨ ਨਿੱਜੀ ਅਤੇ ਫਿਰ ਹੈਵੀ ਕੇਕ ਵਿੱਚ ਮਾਰੀਆਂ ਜਾਂਦੀਆਂ ਹਨ ਜਨਮ` | |
| 2. `ਦੇ ਨਾਲ ਸਨਮਾਨਿਤ ਕੀਤਾ ਤਾਂ ਦੇਵੀ ਮਹਾਤਮਯਮ ਅਨੁਸਾਰ ਉਸਨੇ ਊਰਜਾ ਕੁਸ਼ਲਤਾ ਨਾਲ ਹਰਾਇਆ 24 ਵਿੱਚ ਪੈਸਾ` | |
| 3. `ਹੈ 3 october egyptclay sai jayalakshmy jayaram montinee tangphong thassha december retrieved 25 ਸ੍ਰੀ...` | |
| **Context Size 2:** | |
| 1. `ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ ਮੁਗ਼ਲ ਸਮਰਾਟ ਅਕਬਰ ਦੀ ਮੁੱਖ ਭੂਮਿਕਾ ਵਿੱਚ ਲਿਖਦੇ ਹਨ ਕਿ ਆਜ਼ਾਦੀ ਤੋਂ ਬਾਅਦ ਉਸਨੂੰ ਗਿਆਨ` | |
| 2. `ਗਿਆ ਸੀ ਵਿੱਚ ਇਸ ਸਥਿਤੀ ਨੂੰ ਖਤਮ ਹੋ ਗਿਆ ਇਸ ਗੱਲ ਦੀ ਪੁਸ਼ਟੀ ਕੀਤੀ ਕਿ ਸਾਰਾ ਨੇ` | |
| 3. `ਤੌਰ ਤੇ ਰਾਜ ਬਿਹਾਰ ਵਿੱਚ ਚੋਖੇ ਸੁਧਾਰ ਦੇ ਸਮੇਂ ਤੋਂ ਇੱਥੇ ਆ ਕੇ ਜਾਂ ਮਿਰਚਾਂ ਸ਼ਾਮਲ ਕਰਦਾ` | |
| **Context Size 3:** | |
| 1. `ਕੀਤਾ ਗਿਆ ਸੀ ਮਹਾਰਾਸ਼ਟਰ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਨੇ ਸਮਾਜਿਕ ਵਿਗਿਆਨ ਵਿੱਚ ਦੇਸ਼ ਦਾ ਸਭ ਤੋਂ ਮਕਬੂਲ ਕਹਾਣੀ big two hearted` | |
| 2. `ਦੇ ਰੂਪ ਵਿੱਚ ਸ਼ਾਮਲ ਕੀਤਾ ਗਿਆ ਹੈ ਜਿਸ ਵਿੱਚ ਫਾਰਸੀ ਅਤੇ ਯੂਨਾਨੀਆਂ ਨੇ ਮਸ਼ਹੂਰ ਕਾਨਾ ਜੋ ਮਧੂਮੱਖੀਆਂ ਤੋਂ` | |
| 3. `ਕਿਹਾ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ ਪਰੰਪਰਾ ਦੇ ਸੰਬੰਧ ਵਿੱਚ ਕੈਂਬਰਿਜ ਯੂਨੀਵਰਸਿਟੀ ਦੇ ਹਿਸਾਬਦਾਨ ਐੱਚ ਐੱਫ਼ ਬੇਕਰ ਅਤੇ ਈ ਡਬਲਿਊ ਹੌਬਸਨ` | |
| **Context Size 4:** | |
| 1. `ਸਾਲ ਦੀ ਉਮਰ ਵਿੱਚ ਉਸਦੀ ਮੌਤ ਹੋ ਗਈ ਉਸਨੇ ਆਪਣਾ ਜੀਵਨ ਆਪਣੇ ਪਤੀ ਅਤੇ ਇੱਕ ਬੇਟੇ ਨਾਲ ਕੈਨੇਡਾ ਦੇ` | |
| 2. `ਦਾ ਇੱਕ ਪਿੰਡ ਹੈ ਹਵਾਲੇ ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹੇ ਦੇ ਪਿੰਡ ਬਲਾਕ ਦੇ ਪਿੰਡ` | |
| 3. `ਵੀ ਕਿਹਾ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ ਦੁਆਰਾ ਵਰਤੀ ਜਾਂਦੀ ਇੱਕ ਵੱਖਰੀ ਕਿਸਮ ਦੀ ਕਿਤਾਬ ਹੈ ਜਿਸ ਗੀਹੋਨ ਦਰਿਆ ਮੰਨਿਆ ਗਿਆ ਹੈ` | |
| ### Generated Text Samples (Subword-based) | |
| Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model: | |
| **Context Size 1:** | |
| 1. `_rstederishjh_ਗ੍ਰਾ` | |
| 2. `ਰ_ਮੁੱਖ_ਵਿਚ_they:_ਮਾਂ_` | |
| 3. `ਸਨੇ_ਪੈਦਾ_ਅਭਿਨੇ_ਸੀ।_ਹੈ।_` | |
| **Context Size 2:** | |
| 1. `ਰ_ਬਣੀ_ਸੰਗ੍ਰਹਿਣ_ਵਾਈਆਂ_ਬਾਹ` | |
| 2. `_ਅਤੇ_ਜ਼ੈਨ_ਯੂਨੀਵਰਮ_ਜਿਸਨੂੰ_` | |
| 3. `,_ਖੇਡਾਂ_ਵਿੱਚ_ਉਹ_ਕੁਮਾ_ਪੜ੍ਹਾ` | |
| **Context Size 3:** | |
| 1. `_ਵਿੱਚ_ਪੋਲੀਆਂ_ਹਨ।_ਉਹ_ਆਪਣੇ` | |
| 2. `ਵਿੱਚ_ਹੋਇਆ_ਅਤੇ_ਰਸਮੀ)_ਜਾਂ_ਬ` | |
| 3. `_ਦੇ_ਨਾਲ_ਸੰਬੰਧ_ਰੱਖਦੇ_ਹਨ।_` | |
| **Context Size 4:** | |
| 1. `_ਵਿੱਚ_ਇੱਕ_ਸਰੋਤ_ਜਿਸ_ਵਿੱਚ_ਲਿਆ` | |
| 2. `_ਅਤੇ_ਕਰਨੈਲ_ਨਪੋਲੀਅਨ(20_ਫੁੱ` | |
| 3. `_ਹੈ।_ਮੁਫਤ_ਸਿਰਾਜ-ਉਦ-ਦੌਲਾ_ਦੀ` | |
| ### Key Findings | |
| - **Best Predictability:** Context-4 (word) with 93.6% predictability | |
| - **Branching Factor:** Decreases with context size (more deterministic) | |
| - **Memory Trade-off:** Larger contexts require more storage (4,276,620 contexts) | |
| - **Recommendation:** Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation | |
| --- | |
| ## 4. Vocabulary Analysis | |
|  | |
|  | |
|  | |
| ### Statistics | |
| | Metric | Value | | |
| |--------|-------| | |
| | Vocabulary Size | 242,047 | | |
| | Total Tokens | 18,725,732 | | |
| | Mean Frequency | 77.36 | | |
| | Median Frequency | 4 | | |
| | Frequency Std Dev | 2689.48 | | |
| ### Most Common Words | |
| | Rank | Word | Frequency | | |
| |------|------|-----------| | |
| | 1 | ਵਿੱਚ | 572,433 | | |
| | 2 | ਦੇ | 531,722 | | |
| | 3 | ਹੈ | 471,753 | | |
| | 4 | ਅਤੇ | 432,771 | | |
| | 5 | ਦੀ | 370,327 | | |
| | 6 | ਨੂੰ | 275,364 | | |
| | 7 | ਦਾ | 267,922 | | |
| | 8 | ਸੀ | 222,609 | | |
| | 9 | ਇੱਕ | 219,966 | | |
| | 10 | ਤੋਂ | 188,860 | | |
| ### Least Common Words (from vocabulary) | |
| | Rank | Word | Frequency | | |
| |------|------|-----------| | |
| | 1 | ਸੁੰਦਰਨਰ | 2 | | |
| | 2 | ਚੱਕਰਾਈ | 2 | | |
| | 3 | divyakirti | 2 | | |
| | 4 | csie | 2 | | |
| | 5 | ਵਿਟਾਲੀ | 2 | | |
| | 6 | ਸ਼ਮਤੀਕੋਵ | 2 | | |
| | 7 | bvsc | 2 | | |
| | 8 | mvph | 2 | | |
| | 9 | ਉੱਲੀਮਾਰਾਂ | 2 | | |
| | 10 | sarkaryawah | 2 | | |
| ### Zipf's Law Analysis | |
| | Metric | Value | | |
| |--------|-------| | |
| | Zipf Coefficient | 1.1016 | | |
| | R² (Goodness of Fit) | 0.993300 | | |
| | Adherence Quality | **excellent** | | |
| ### Coverage Analysis | |
| | Top N Words | Coverage | | |
| |-------------|----------| | |
| | Top 100 | 40.3% | | |
| | Top 1,000 | 64.7% | | |
| | Top 5,000 | 81.6% | | |
| | Top 10,000 | 87.3% | | |
| ### Key Findings | |
| - **Zipf Compliance:** R²=0.9933 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law | |
| - **High Frequency Dominance:** Top 100 words cover 40.3% of corpus | |
| - **Long Tail:** 232,047 words needed for remaining 12.7% 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 | 0.8342 🏆 | 0.3762 | N/A | N/A | | |
| | **mono_64d** | 64 | 0.8303 | 0.3067 | N/A | N/A | | |
| | **mono_128d** | 128 | 0.8116 | 0.2410 | N/A | N/A | | |
| | **aligned_32d** | 32 | 0.8342 | 0.3832 | 0.0760 | 0.3300 | | |
| | **aligned_64d** | 64 | 0.8303 | 0.3087 | 0.1300 | 0.4120 | | |
| | **aligned_128d** | 128 | 0.8116 | 0.2355 | 0.1700 | 0.4920 | | |
| ### Key Findings | |
| - **Best Isotropy:** mono_32d with 0.8342 (more uniform distribution) | |
| - **Semantic Density:** Average pairwise similarity of 0.3085. Lower values indicate better semantic separation. | |
| - **Alignment Quality:** Aligned models achieve up to 17.0% 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 | **-0.529** | 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 | | |
| |--------|----------| | |
| | `-ਸ` | ਸੱਬਲਕਸ਼ਮੀ, ਸਪਿਨੋਜ਼ਾ, ਸਵਰੋ | | |
| | `-ਕ` | ਕਿਸਮੇਟ, ਕੋਲਵਿਨ, ਕੀਮਾਰ | | |
| | `-ਮ` | ਮੰਡੀ, ਮਾਰਟਨੀ, ਮੋਹਨਕਾਧਲ | | |
| | `-ਬ` | ਬਿਭੂਤੀਭੂਸ਼ਣ, ਬੈਰੂਨੀ, ਬਚਾਏ | | |
| | `-ਪ` | ਪਲੱਕਡ਼, ਪੀਡਬਲਯੂਏ, ਪੱਟਮੱਲ | | |
| | `-ਅ` | ਅਤਨੂ, ਅਸਾਂਜ, ਅਵਾਰਡxbiz | | |
| | `-ਰ` | ਰਾਏਚੂਰ, ਰੇਸ਼ੇਬਾਜ਼, ਰਵਾਇਤੀ | | |
| | `-ਵ` | ਵਲੱਲੀ, ਵਿਸਾਯਨ, ਵਿਦਆਉਟ | | |
| #### Productive Suffixes | |
| | Suffix | Examples | | |
| |--------|----------| | |
| | `-ਨ` | ਦਵੈਪਾਇਨ, ਜੁਬੀਨ, ਫਾਰੇਨ | | |
| | `-ਰ` | ਗੁਰਬੀਰ, ਯੋਗਤਾਸੁਪਰ, ਆਲਿਵਰ | | |
| | `-ਸ` | ਓਵਰਟੋਨਸ, ਟੈਨਿਨਸ, ਜੋਨਜਸ | | |
| | `-s` | missions, legs, democracies | | |
| | `-ਲ` | ਮੋਹਨਕਾਧਲ, ਸਕੂਲ, ਪੱਟਮੱਲ | | |
| | `-ਕ` | ਨਾਸਤਾਲਿਕ, ਓਟਕ, ਅਕ | | |
| | `-ਮ` | ਦੇਮ, ਨਿਮਾਜਨਮ, ਭਾਗਮ | | |
| | `-n` | anchan, broughton, ceylon | | |
| ### 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 | | |
| |------|----------|------------------|----------| | |
| | `indi` | 3.26x | 45 contexts | indic, hindi, indie | | |
| | `ress` | 3.17x | 50 contexts | cress, press, dress | | |
| | `atio` | 3.32x | 38 contexts | ratio, lation, nation | | |
| | `vers` | 3.08x | 47 contexts | versa, verso, verse | | |
| | `nter` | 3.08x | 45 contexts | enter, inter, unter | | |
| | `tion` | 3.01x | 48 contexts | lation, option, nation | | |
| | `ment` | 3.15x | 37 contexts | mente, mentem, cement | | |
| | `stor` | 3.11x | 35 contexts | astor, jstor, stork | | |
| | `ture` | 3.05x | 34 contexts | mature, nature, future | | |
| | `iver` | 3.13x | 29 contexts | diver, river, giver | | |
| | `ctio` | 3.05x | 25 contexts | action, auction, section | | |
| | `mber` | 3.12x | 22 contexts | ember, amber, number | | |
| ### 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 | | |
| |--------|--------|-----------|----------| | |
| | `-ਕ` | `-ਨ` | 41 words | ਕੈਲੇਡੋਨੀਅਨ, ਕਰਤੱਵਪੂਰਨ | | |
| | `-ਸ` | `-ਨ` | 37 words | ਸੰਰਚਨ, ਸਿਵਨ | | |
| | `-ਸ` | `-ਰ` | 31 words | ਸੇਲਾਂਗੋਰ, ਸਾਰਤ੍ਰ | | |
| | `-ਸ` | `-ਕ` | 26 words | ਸਮਾਨਆਰਥਕ, ਸਕੈਪਟਿਕ | | |
| | `-ਕ` | `-ਰ` | 26 words | ਕੈਨਰ, ਕੈਬਰ | | |
| | `-ਮ` | `-ਨ` | 19 words | ਮੇਰੀਨ, ਮੁਕੁੰਦਨ | | |
| | `-ਮ` | `-ਰ` | 17 words | ਮੰਜਰੇਕਰ, ਮਿਊਰ | | |
| | `-ਬ` | `-ਨ` | 17 words | ਬੈਗੁਈਸੇਨ, ਬ੍ਰੇਮੇਨ | | |
| | `-ਪ` | `-ਨ` | 16 words | ਪੋਥਨ, ਪ੍ਰਸਾਸਨ | | |
| | `-ਰ` | `-ਨ` | 16 words | ਰੂਪਵਾਨ, ਰਘੂਨਾਥਨ | | |
| ### 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 | | |
| |------|-----------------|------------|------| | |
| | intentions | **`intention-s`** | 4.5 | `intention` | | |
| | ਅਤਾਉੱਲ੍ਹਾ | **`ਅ-ਤ-ਾਉੱਲ੍ਹਾ`** | 4.5 | `ਾਉੱਲ੍ਹਾ` | | |
| | orientale | **`oriental-e`** | 4.5 | `oriental` | | |
| | presented | **`present-ed`** | 4.5 | `present` | | |
| | ecosystems | **`ecosystem-s`** | 4.5 | `ecosystem` | | |
| | ਵਿਸ਼ਵੰਭਰਨ | **`ਵਿਸ਼ਵੰਭਰ-ਨ`** | 4.5 | `ਵਿਸ਼ਵੰਭਰ` | | |
| | commissioner | **`commission-er`** | 4.5 | `commission` | | |
| | potentials | **`potential-s`** | 4.5 | `potential` | | |
| | ਅਜ਼ਹੇਂਦਰਾ | **`ਅ-ਜ-਼ਹੇਂਦਰਾ`** | 4.5 | `਼ਹੇਂਦਰਾ` | | |
| | manhattans | **`manhattan-s`** | 4.5 | `manhattan` | | |
| | neighbors | **`neighbor-s`** | 4.5 | `neighbor` | | |
| | ਹਾਰਪਰਕੋਲਿਨਸ | **`ਹਾਰਪਰਕੋਲਿਨ-ਸ`** | 4.5 | `ਹਾਰਪਰਕੋਲਿਨ` | | |
| | audiobooks | **`audiobook-s`** | 4.5 | `audiobook` | | |
| | capitalists | **`capitalist-s`** | 4.5 | `capitalist` | | |
| | ਇਲੈਕਟ੍ਰਾਨ | **`ਇਲੈਕਟ੍ਰਾ-ਨ`** | 4.5 | `ਇਲੈਕਟ੍ਰਾ` | | |
| ### 6.6 Linguistic Interpretation | |
| > **Automated Insight:** | |
| The language Punjabi 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 (4.04x) | | |
| | N-gram | **2-gram** | Lowest perplexity (1,824) | | |
| | Markov | **Context-4** | Highest predictability (93.6%) | | |
| | 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 19:32:35* | |