Text Generation
fastText
Tigrinya
wikilangs
nlp
tokenizer
embeddings
n-gram
markov
wikipedia
feature-extraction
sentence-similarity
tokenization
n-grams
markov-chain
text-mining
babelvec
vocabulous
vocabulary
monolingual
family-semitic_ethiopic
Instructions to use wikilangs/ti with libraries, inference providers, notebooks, and local apps. Follow these links to get started.
- Libraries
- fastText
How to use wikilangs/ti with fastText:
from huggingface_hub import hf_hub_download import fasttext model = fasttext.load_model(hf_hub_download("wikilangs/ti", "model.bin")) - Notebooks
- Google Colab
- Kaggle
| language: ti | |
| language_name: Tigrinya | |
| language_family: semitic_ethiopic | |
| 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-semitic_ethiopic | |
| license: mit | |
| library_name: wikilangs | |
| pipeline_tag: text-generation | |
| datasets: | |
| - omarkamali/wikipedia-monthly | |
| dataset_info: | |
| name: wikipedia-monthly | |
| description: Monthly snapshots of Wikipedia articles across 300+ languages | |
| metrics: | |
| - name: best_compression_ratio | |
| type: compression | |
| value: 3.058 | |
| - name: best_isotropy | |
| type: isotropy | |
| value: 0.1219 | |
| - name: vocabulary_size | |
| type: vocab | |
| value: 0 | |
| generated: 2026-01-11 | |
| # Tigrinya - Wikilangs Models | |
| ## Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study | |
| This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on **Tigrinya** 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** | 2.515x | 2.52 | 0.2599% | 148,897 | | |
| | **16k** | 2.779x | 2.78 | 0.2872% | 134,751 | | |
| | **32k** | 3.058x 🏆 | 3.06 | 0.3160% | 122,449 | | |
| ### Tokenization Examples | |
| Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size: | |
| **Sample 1:** `ኢጣልያ (፣ ) ብወግዒ ኢጣልያዊት ሪፓብሊክ ()፣ ኣባልን መስራቲትን ኤውሮጳዊ ሕብረት፣ ስግረ-ኣህጉር ልኡላዊት ሃገር እያ። ር...` | |
| | Vocab | Tokens | Count | | |
| |-------|--------|-------| | |
| | 8k | `▁ኢጣልያ ▁( ፣ ▁) ▁ብወግዒ ▁ኢጣልያ ዊት ▁ሪፓብሊክ ▁() ፣ ... (+18 more)` | 28 | | |
| | 16k | `▁ኢጣልያ ▁( ፣ ▁) ▁ብወግዒ ▁ኢጣልያ ዊት ▁ሪፓብሊክ ▁() ፣ ... (+17 more)` | 27 | | |
| | 32k | `▁ኢጣልያ ▁( ፣ ▁) ▁ብወግዒ ▁ኢጣልያዊት ▁ሪፓብሊክ ▁() ፣ ▁ኣባልን ... (+14 more)` | 24 | | |
| **Sample 2:** `ኣርጀንቲና (፣ )፣ ብወግዒ ሪፓብሊክ ኣርጀንቲና (፣ )፣ ኣብ ደቡባዊ ሸነኽ ናይ ደቡብ ኣመሪካ እትርከብ ምስ ኣትላንቲካዊ ውቅ...` | |
| | Vocab | Tokens | Count | | |
| |-------|--------|-------| | |
| | 8k | `▁ኣርጀንቲና ▁( ፣ ▁) ፣ ▁ብወግዒ ▁ሪፓብሊክ ▁ኣርጀንቲና ▁( ፣ ... (+28 more)` | 38 | | |
| | 16k | `▁ኣርጀንቲና ▁( ፣ ▁) ፣ ▁ብወግዒ ▁ሪፓብሊክ ▁ኣርጀንቲና ▁( ፣ ... (+25 more)` | 35 | | |
| | 32k | `▁ኣርጀንቲና ▁( ፣ ▁) ፣ ▁ብወግዒ ▁ሪፓብሊክ ▁ኣርጀንቲና ▁( ፣ ... (+22 more)` | 32 | | |
| **Sample 3:** `ማቲው ስቲቨን ሹልዘ (Matthew Steven «Matt» Schulze) ኣሜሪካዊ ተዋሳኣይ ፊልም እዩ። ኣብ ሚዙሪ እዩ ተወሊዱ።...` | |
| | Vocab | Tokens | Count | | |
| |-------|--------|-------| | |
| | 8k | `▁ማ ቲ ው ▁ስቲቨን ▁ሹ ልዘ ▁( mat th ew ... (+40 more)` | 50 | | |
| | 16k | `▁ማቲው ▁ስቲቨን ▁ሹልዘ ▁( mat th ew ▁steven ▁« matt ... (+29 more)` | 39 | | |
| | 32k | `▁ማቲው ▁ስቲቨን ▁ሹልዘ ▁( matthew ▁steven ▁« matt » ▁schulze ... (+22 more)` | 32 | | |
| ### Key Findings | |
| - **Best Compression:** 32k achieves 3.058x compression | |
| - **Lowest UNK Rate:** 8k with 0.2599% 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 | 674 | 9.40 | 936 | 35.2% | 100.0% | | |
| | **2-gram** | Subword | 1,449 | 10.50 | 6,000 | 36.6% | 74.2% | | |
| | **3-gram** | Word | 494 🏆 | 8.95 | 653 | 38.5% | 100.0% | | |
| | **3-gram** | Subword | 7,666 | 12.90 | 20,589 | 14.3% | 42.7% | | |
| | **4-gram** | Word | 1,390 | 10.44 | 1,640 | 18.2% | 67.9% | | |
| | **4-gram** | Subword | 19,863 | 14.28 | 45,780 | 8.8% | 28.2% | | |
| | **5-gram** | Word | 1,166 | 10.19 | 1,246 | 17.6% | 82.5% | | |
| | **5-gram** | Subword | 24,432 | 14.58 | 45,809 | 6.5% | 24.0% | | |
| ### Top 5 N-grams by Size | |
| **2-grams (Word):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `ኩዕሶ እግሪ` | 161 | | |
| | 2 | `ከምኡ ውን` | 138 | | |
| | 3 | `0 1` | 105 | | |
| | 4 | `upright 0` | 103 | | |
| | 5 | `frameless upright` | 103 | | |
| **3-grams (Word):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `upright 0 1` | 103 | | |
| | 2 | `frameless upright 0` | 103 | | |
| | 3 | `ቅድሚ ልደተ ክርስቶስ` | 28 | | |
| | 4 | `ሰለላሁ ዓለይሂ ወሰለም` | 23 | | |
| | 5 | `ሙሓመድ ሰለላሁ ዓለይሂ` | 23 | | |
| **4-grams (Word):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `frameless upright 0 1` | 103 | | |
| | 2 | `ሙሓመድ ሰለላሁ ዓለይሂ ወሰለም` | 23 | | |
| | 3 | `ነቢይ ሙሓመድ ሰለላሁ ዓለይሂ` | 21 | | |
| | 4 | `ንዓኻ ንዓኻ ንዓኻ ንዓኻ` | 16 | | |
| | 5 | `ፕሮፌሽናል ተጻዋታይ ኩዕሶ እግሪ` | 15 | | |
| **5-grams (Word):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `ነቢይ ሙሓመድ ሰለላሁ ዓለይሂ ወሰለም` | 21 | | |
| | 2 | `ንዓኻ ንዓኻ ንዓኻ ንዓኻ ንዓኻ` | 15 | | |
| | 3 | `ፕሮፌሽናል ተጻዋታይ ኩዕሶ እግሪ ኮይኑ` | 13 | | |
| | 4 | `p q r s t` | 10 | | |
| | 5 | `5 frameless upright 0 1` | 10 | | |
| **2-grams (Subword):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `_ ኣ` | 7,078 | | |
| | 2 | `ት _` | 6,640 | | |
| | 3 | `ን _` | 6,434 | | |
| | 4 | `ብ _` | 5,376 | | |
| | 5 | `_ እ` | 4,167 | | |
| **3-grams (Subword):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `_ ኣ ብ` | 3,209 | | |
| | 2 | `ኣ ብ _` | 2,860 | | |
| | 3 | `ታ ት _` | 1,640 | | |
| | 4 | `_ ካ ብ` | 965 | | |
| | 5 | `_ ና ይ` | 961 | | |
| **4-grams (Subword):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `_ ኣ ብ _` | 2,832 | | |
| | 2 | `_ ና ይ _` | 750 | | |
| | 3 | `_ ካ ብ _` | 731 | | |
| | 4 | `_ ድ ማ _` | 658 | | |
| | 5 | `_ እ ዩ ።` | 577 | | |
| **5-grams (Subword):** | |
| | Rank | N-gram | Count | | |
| |------|--------|-------| | |
| | 1 | `_ እ ዩ ። _` | 522 | | |
| | 2 | `። _ ኣ ብ _` | 424 | | |
| | 3 | `፡ _ ኣ ብ _` | 350 | | |
| | 4 | `_ ኣ ብ _ መ` | 297 | | |
| | 5 | `ኢ ት ዮ ጵ ያ` | 264 | | |
| ### Key Findings | |
| - **Best Perplexity:** 3-gram (word) with 494 | |
| - **Entropy Trend:** Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable) | |
| - **Coverage:** Top-1000 patterns cover ~24% 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 | 0.6172 | 1.534 | 3.00 | 20,182 | 38.3% | | |
| | **1** | Subword | 1.7048 | 3.260 | 18.92 | 788 | 0.0% | | |
| | **2** | Word | 0.1201 | 1.087 | 1.20 | 60,235 | 88.0% | | |
| | **2** | Subword | 0.8301 | 1.778 | 4.02 | 14,892 | 17.0% | | |
| | **3** | Word | 0.0269 | 1.019 | 1.04 | 71,825 | 97.3% | | |
| | **3** | Subword | 0.5079 | 1.422 | 2.25 | 59,764 | 49.2% | | |
| | **4** | Word | 0.0074 🏆 | 1.005 | 1.01 | 74,088 | 99.3% | | |
| | **4** | Subword | 0.2614 | 1.199 | 1.48 | 134,188 | 73.9% | | |
| ### Generated Text Samples (Word-based) | |
| Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model: | |
| **Context Size 1:** | |
| 1. `ኣብ ዓንቀጻት ኮንፈደረሽን ኩዕሶ እግሪ ክለብ ኮይና ኣስታት 115 ኪሎመተር ሪሒቓ ትርከብ አብ ሰሜን ኣህጉር ኣል` | |
| 2. `ናይ ጭንቀት ኣብ ድማ ሓደ ኣርእስቲ ካብቲ ቦታ ብኢንፎርሜሽን እና ቱማስ ሆሎፔይንየን ኣብ ዝኾነ ቁርኣን ብስም` | |
| 3. `እዩ ሊኢኽዎም ገለ ካብቶም ብብዝሒ ተተኰስትን ማረኸ እዚ ካልኣይ ደረጃ ብምሓዝ ንብዙሓት ኣዝዩ ቅዱስ ብትግርኛ መጻሕፍቲ` | |
| **Context Size 2:** | |
| 1. `ኩዕሶ እግሪ ክለብ እያ ኣብ ህንዲ ካብ ዘለዋ ዓበይቲ ደገፍቲ ሓንቲ እያ እታ ክለብ ኣብ ከተማ ዓድ` | |
| 2. `ከምኡ ውን እቲ ዓሚል ክፍሊት ንኽገብር ዝሕግዙ ኣማራጺታት ይሕብር ሓደ ዓሚል ንኣቕሑ ንምልዋጥ ወይ ድሕሪ ምፍንጃር ምስትንፋስ` | |
| 3. `0 1 ሪፓብሊክ ኮንጎ 2 344 858 30 5 frameless upright 0 1 ኡጋንዳ ሪፓብሊክ ኡጋንዳ 241` | |
| **Context Size 3:** | |
| 1. `frameless upright 0 1 ላትቭያ ሪፓብሊክ ላትቭያ 64 589 1 925 800 34 3 frameless upright 0 1` | |
| 2. `upright 0 1 ኤርትራ ሃገረ ኤርትራ 117 600 5 869 869 37 frameless upright 0 1 ስዊዘርላንድ ኮንፈደረሽን` | |
| 3. `ቅድሚ ልደተ ክርስቶስ ብኣካሜኒድ ገዛኢ ቂሮስ ዓቢ ዝጠፍኡ ጥንታዊነት ዘመነ ሄለኒስትን ዘመነ ቢዛንታይንን ሰፈራታት ኤዮልያን ኣዮንያንን ግሪኽን ብሰፊሑ` | |
| **Context Size 4:** | |
| 1. `frameless upright 0 1 ቱርኪ ሪፓብሊክ ቱርኪ 783 356 105 frameless upright 0 1 ስዋዚላንድ ንግስነት ስዋዚላንድ 17 364` | |
| 2. `ሙሓመድ ሰለላሁ ዓለይሂ ወሰለም ድማ ነቲ ዘይተማለአ ሕግታት ብምጽፋፍ ንኹሉ መዳያት ህይወት ሓደ ብሓደ ዝትንክፍ ጎደሎ ዘይብሉ ሃብታምን ውዱእን` | |
| 3. `ነቢይ ሙሓመድ ሰለላሁ ዓለይሂ ወሰለም ብ ህላወ መላእኽቲ ኣላህ ክንኣምን እውን ኣዚዙና ኢዩ ካብቶም ዝጠቐስናዮም ሽዱሽተ ዓንድታት እምነት ድሕሪ` | |
| ### Generated Text Samples (Subword-based) | |
| Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model: | |
| **Context Size 1:** | |
| 1. `_ኣበይ_ሰለ-ት_ና_anc_` | |
| 2. `ንኩባ።_ሓዘ_፡_ኣካ_ሕ_ግ` | |
| 3. `ብ_ክር_ፋጭንግራት፣_ደ_ና` | |
| **Context Size 2:** | |
| 1. `_ኣብ_ፊን_ብህይወት_ስሞም_` | |
| 2. `ት_ሱፐር_ዝወድአ_።_ነይራ_` | |
| 3. `ን_16._171_ግዜ_ብግቡኡ` | |
| **Context Size 3:** | |
| 1. `_ኣብኡ_ድማ፡_ኣሃዱታት_7_ዋ` | |
| 2. `ኣብ_ዝነበረን_ዝኣዘዘ’ሞ፡_ከ` | |
| 3. `ታት_ንምእማን_ኣይሁድን_ና_ያ` | |
| **Context Size 4:** | |
| 1. `_ኣብ_ኢትዮጵያዊ_ኣወሃሃዲ_ሙዚ` | |
| 2. `_ናይ_መጀመርታ_ሰፈራታት_ዝኾነ` | |
| 3. `_ካብ_ዝምዕብላ_ዘለዋ_እንትኸው` | |
| ### Key Findings | |
| - **Best Predictability:** Context-4 (word) with 99.3% predictability | |
| - **Branching Factor:** Decreases with context size (more deterministic) | |
| - **Memory Trade-off:** Larger contexts require more storage (134,188 contexts) | |
| - **Recommendation:** Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation | |
| --- | |
| ## 4. Vocabulary Analysis | |
|  | |
|  | |
|  | |
| ### Statistics | |
| | Metric | Value | | |
| |--------|-------| | |
| | Vocabulary Size | 7,251 | | |
| | Total Tokens | 64,854 | | |
| | Mean Frequency | 8.94 | | |
| | Median Frequency | 3 | | |
| | Frequency Std Dev | 43.70 | | |
| ### Most Common Words | |
| | Rank | Word | Frequency | | |
| |------|------|-----------| | |
| | 1 | ኣብ | 2,873 | | |
| | 2 | እዩ | 820 | | |
| | 3 | ናይ | 807 | | |
| | 4 | ካብ | 750 | | |
| | 5 | ድማ | 704 | | |
| | 6 | እቲ | 554 | | |
| | 7 | ምስ | 433 | | |
| | 8 | ከም | 405 | | |
| | 9 | እዚ | 370 | | |
| | 10 | ሓደ | 339 | | |
| ### Least Common Words (from vocabulary) | |
| | Rank | Word | Frequency | | |
| |------|------|-----------| | |
| | 1 | ቻንቻን | 2 | | |
| | 2 | ጳውሎስ | 2 | | |
| | 3 | ኮቺን | 2 | | |
| | 4 | ፕሪንስተን | 2 | | |
| | 5 | ኣሉቫ | 2 | | |
| | 6 | ኮታያም | 2 | | |
| | 7 | ቫርጌስ | 2 | | |
| | 8 | ዶክትሬት | 2 | | |
| | 9 | ኮሚቴን | 2 | | |
| | 10 | ምኽትል | 2 | | |
| ### Zipf's Law Analysis | |
| | Metric | Value | | |
| |--------|-------| | |
| | Zipf Coefficient | 0.9129 | | |
| | R² (Goodness of Fit) | 0.984365 | | |
| | Adherence Quality | **excellent** | | |
| ### Coverage Analysis | |
| | Top N Words | Coverage | | |
| |-------------|----------| | |
| | Top 100 | 31.6% | | |
| | Top 1,000 | 66.4% | | |
| | Top 5,000 | 93.1% | | |
| | Top 10,000 | 0.0% | | |
| ### Key Findings | |
| - **Zipf Compliance:** R²=0.9844 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law | |
| - **High Frequency Dominance:** Top 100 words cover 31.6% of corpus | |
| - **Long Tail:** -2,749 words needed for remaining 100.0% coverage | |
| --- | |
| ## 5. Word Embeddings Evaluation | |
|  | |
|  | |
|  | |
|  | |
| ### 5.1 Cross-Lingual Alignment | |
|  | |
|  | |
| ### 5.2 Model Comparison | |
| | Model | Dimension | Isotropy | Semantic Density | Alignment R@1 | Alignment R@10 | | |
| |-------|-----------|----------|------------------|---------------|----------------| | |
| | **mono_32d** | 32 | 0.1219 🏆 | 0.5907 | N/A | N/A | | |
| | **mono_64d** | 64 | 0.0304 | 0.6195 | N/A | N/A | | |
| | **mono_128d** | 128 | 0.0069 | 0.6350 | N/A | N/A | | |
| | **aligned_32d** | 32 | 0.1219 | 0.6074 | 0.0108 | 0.2703 | | |
| | **aligned_64d** | 64 | 0.0304 | 0.6287 | 0.0216 | 0.2973 | | |
| | **aligned_128d** | 128 | 0.0069 | 0.6320 | 0.0486 | 0.4054 | | |
| ### Key Findings | |
| - **Best Isotropy:** mono_32d with 0.1219 (more uniform distribution) | |
| - **Semantic Density:** Average pairwise similarity of 0.6189. Lower values indicate better semantic separation. | |
| - **Alignment Quality:** Aligned models achieve up to 4.9% 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 | **2.433** | 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 | | |
| |--------|----------| | |
| | `-ኣ` | ኣለው, ኣስዒቡ, ኣገዳሲት | | |
| | `-ዝ` | ዝዓቐኑ, ዝባን, ዝነብሩላ | | |
| | `-ብ` | ብ19, ብምቁጽጻር, ብሕቲ | | |
| | `-ን` | ንዖኦም, ንዋትን, ንቁጠባ | | |
| | `-ተ` | ተቘጻጸራኦ, ተቖጺሮም, ተርጓሚ | | |
| | `-ም` | ምስተለኽፈ, ምስሊ, ምትሓዝ | | |
| | `-መ` | መርዓውን, መንጎ, መዓስከር | | |
| | `-ክ` | ክርስትያናዊት, ክትዓት, ክምረዙ | | |
| #### Productive Suffixes | |
| | Suffix | Examples | | |
| |--------|----------| | |
| | `-ን` | ዝባን, ከረጋግጽን, ንዋትን | | |
| | `-ት` | ፓራስፖርት, ለካቲት, ጸብጻባት | | |
| | `-ትን` | ንዋትን, ሰባትን, ስርዓትን | | |
| | `-ያን` | ሰልጁካውያን, ኣህጉራውያን, ሽወደናውያን | | |
| | `-ታት` | ስጉምታት, ባህልታት, ጠንቅታት | | |
| | `-ነት` | መንግስታዊነት, ንኣብነት, ንእስነት | | |
| | `-ንን` | ሱዳንን, ተለቪዥንን, ግሪኻውያንን | | |
| ### 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. | |
| *No significant bound stems detected.* | |
| ### 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 | | |
| |--------|--------|-----------|----------| | |
| | `-ኣ` | `-ን` | 20 words | ኣዝየን, ኣህጉራውያን | | |
| | `-ኣ` | `-ያን` | 9 words | ኣህጉራውያን, ኣውስትርያን | | |
| | `-መ` | `-ን` | 8 words | መርዓውን, መታን | | |
| | `-ብ` | `-ን` | 6 words | ብፌደሬሽን, ብዙሃን | | |
| | `-መ` | `-ት` | 5 words | መንግስታዊነት, መስመራት | | |
| | `-ም` | `-ን` | 5 words | ምምቕቓልን, ምቕራብን | | |
| | `-መ` | `-ትን` | 5 words | መግብታትን, መምርሒታትን | | |
| | `-መ` | `-ታት` | 4 words | መጥቃዕቲታት, መልእኽትታት | | |
| | `-ክ` | `-ት` | 3 words | ክርስትያናዊት, ክትዓት | | |
| | `-ብ` | `-ት` | 3 words | ብፕረዚደንት, ብምኽንያት | | |
| ### 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 | | |
| |------|-----------------|------------|------| | |
| | ቱርክመኒስታንን | **`ቱርክመኒስታን-ን`** | 1.5 | `ቱርክመኒስታን` | | |
| | ኣሰላሙዓለይኩም | **`ኣ-ሰላሙዓለይኩም`** | 1.5 | `ሰላሙዓለይኩም` | | |
| | ኣውስትራሊያውያን | **`ኣውስትራሊያውያ-ን`** | 1.5 | `ኣውስትራሊያውያ` | | |
| | ኢንሳይክሎፔድያን | **`ኢንሳይክሎፔድያ-ን`** | 1.5 | `ኢንሳይክሎፔድያ` | | |
| ### 6.6 Linguistic Interpretation | |
| > **Automated Insight:** | |
| The language Tigrinya shows high morphological productivity. The subword models are significantly more efficient than word models, suggesting a rich system of affixation or compounding. | |
| > **Note on Idiomaticity:** The high Idiomaticity Gap suggests a large number of frequent multi-word expressions or formulaic sequences that are statistically distinct from their component parts. | |
| --- | |
| ## 7. Summary & Recommendations | |
|  | |
| ### Production Recommendations | |
| | Component | Recommended | Rationale | | |
| |-----------|-------------|-----------| | |
| | Tokenizer | **32k BPE** | Best compression (3.06x) | | |
| | N-gram | **3-gram** | Lowest perplexity (494) | | |
| | Markov | **Context-4** | Highest predictability (99.3%) | | |
| | 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: 2026-01-11 00:50:27* | |