CoolFace
Modelpublic

wikilangs/bcl

sourceHugging Facemitupdated 9mo agoView on Hugging Face
0likes
Model Card

Central Bikol - Wikilangs Models

Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study

This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on Central Bikol 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

[image]

Analysis and Evaluation


1. Tokenizer Evaluation

[image]

[image]

[image]

[image]

Results

Vocab SizeCompressionAvg Token LenUNK RateTotal Tokens
8k3.957x3.960.0152%354,491
16k4.291x4.290.0165%326,860
32k4.572x4.580.0176%306,791
64k4.810x 🏆4.810.0185%291,605

Tokenization Examples

Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size:

Sample 1: An sarong taon sa Gregoryanong kalendaryo. Enero Pebrero Marso Abril Mayo Hunyo ...

VocabTokensCount
8k▁an ▁sarong ▁taon ▁sa ▁gregoryanong ▁kalendaryo . ▁enero ▁pebrero ▁marso ... (+9 more)19
16k▁an ▁sarong ▁taon ▁sa ▁gregoryanong ▁kalendaryo . ▁enero ▁pebrero ▁marso ... (+9 more)19
32k▁an ▁sarong ▁taon ▁sa ▁gregoryanong ▁kalendaryo . ▁enero ▁pebrero ▁marso ... (+9 more)19
64k▁an ▁sarong ▁taon ▁sa ▁gregoryanong ▁kalendaryo . ▁enero ▁pebrero ▁marso ... (+9 more)19

Sample 2: Si Donald James "Donny" Lucas (Montreal) dating sarong Amerikanong entertainer.

VocabTokensCount
8k▁si ▁d onald ▁james ▁" don ny " ▁luc as ... (+10 more)20
16k▁si ▁donald ▁james ▁" don ny " ▁lucas ▁( mont ... (+7 more)17
32k▁si ▁donald ▁james ▁" don ny " ▁lucas ▁( mont ... (+7 more)17
64k▁si ▁donald ▁james ▁" don ny " ▁lucas ▁( mont ... (+7 more)17

Sample 3: An Yenon sarong baryo sa Abi na lugar kan gobyerno lokal sa Cross River State, N...

VocabTokensCount
8k▁an ▁y en on ▁sarong ▁baryo ▁sa ▁ab i ▁na ... (+18 more)28
16k▁an ▁y en on ▁sarong ▁baryo ▁sa ▁ab i ▁na ... (+17 more)27
32k▁an ▁yen on ▁sarong ▁baryo ▁sa ▁abi ▁na ▁lugar ▁kan ... (+15 more)25
64k▁an ▁yen on ▁sarong ▁baryo ▁sa ▁abi ▁na ▁lugar ▁kan ... (+15 more)25

Key Findings

  • Best Compression: 64k achieves 4.810x compression
  • Lowest UNK Rate: 8k with 0.0152% 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

[image]

[image]

[image]

Results

N-gramVariantPerplexityEntropyUnique N-gramsTop-100 CoverageTop-1000 Coverage
2-gramWord29,76214.86139,54313.5%31.1%
2-gramSubword215 🏆7.756,82972.7%99.3%
3-gramWord81,08116.31219,1467.5%19.3%
3-gramSubword1,80110.8146,30733.2%73.8%
4-gramWord128,13116.97304,7829.2%17.0%
4-gramSubword10,35313.34249,11418.9%43.8%
5-gramWord55,13515.75164,72116.0%24.8%
5-gramSubword39,11115.26711,66311.0%29.6%

Top 5 N-grams by Size

2-grams (Word):

RankN-gramCount
1sa mga30,516
2an mga27,434
3kan mga22,662
4iyo an17,275
5nin mga16,825

3-grams (Word):

RankN-gramCount
1panluwas na takod5,506
2mga panluwas na4,909
3toltolan mga panluwas2,791
4para sa mga2,778
5igwa ining sukol2,227

4-grams (Word):

RankN-gramCount
1mga panluwas na takod4,613
2toltolan mga panluwas na2,791
3igwa ining sukol na2,139
4philippine standard geographic code1,751
5sa sensus kan igwa1,728

5-grams (Word):

RankN-gramCount
1toltolan mga panluwas na takod2,656
2sa sensus kan igwa ining1,724
3standard geographic code local governance1,722
4com philippine standard geographic code1,722
5philatlas com philippine standard geographic1,722

2-grams (Subword):

RankN-gramCount
1a n1,358,991
2a _1,303,105
3n _1,232,546
4_ s834,968
5n a797,325

3-grams (Subword):

RankN-gramCount
1a n _702,654
2_ n a541,439
3_ s a524,860
4n g _465,207
5_ k a378,564

4-grams (Subword):

RankN-gramCount
1_ s a _337,217
2_ n a _333,981
3k a n _236,687
4_ k a n232,949
5_ a n _213,433

5-grams (Subword):

RankN-gramCount
1_ k a n _225,191
2_ m g a _166,824
3_ n i n _131,940
4a s i n _125,892
5_ a s i n125,534

Key Findings

  • Best Perplexity: 2-gram (subword) with 215
  • Entropy Trend: Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable)
  • Coverage: Top-1000 patterns cover ~30% of corpus
  • Recommendation: 4-gram or 5-gram for best predictive performance

3. Markov Chain Evaluation

[image]

[image]

[image]

Results

ContextVariantAvg EntropyPerplexityBranching FactorUnique ContextsPredictability
1Word0.77791.7156.29329,12722.2%
1Subword0.91631.8875.397,1458.4%
2Word0.31861.2471.992,064,13868.1%
2Subword0.53361.4483.3538,46946.6%
3Word0.13551.0981.284,087,35586.5%
3Subword0.63801.5563.61128,96736.2%
4Word0.0498 🏆1.0351.085,215,53495.0%
4Subword0.64871.5683.06465,40935.1%

Generated Text Samples (Word-based)

Below are text samples generated from each word-based Markov chain model:

Context Size 1:

  1. 1.sa tipan an apod na dinadalihigan kan taon kan komputasyon asin ipagbabalik sa tahaw kan taon
  2. 2.na nag eeksister an mga mimetikong kalibangbang patag dakol na coronet an pahayag tanganing ipabisto...
  3. 3.an mga komposisyon kan kompositor asin ngapit iyong watawat ang halaman asin gurutom suya sumo mga

Context Size 2:

  1. 1.sa mga minasunod the crucifixion saint anthony wisconsin si gross sarong multi partidong estado kata...
  2. 2.an mga osipon sarong babaeng kustomer ining lalaki winaki siya nin labing 300 bilyon historya si jam...
  3. 3.kan mga aldaw bago ini ibugtak sa sitwasyon kan halawig na kasaysayan asin sarong best seller asin

Context Size 3:

  1. 1.panluwas na takod opisyal na websityo toltolan paadalan sa kabikolan
  2. 2.mga panluwas na takod philatlas com philippine standard geographic code local governance performance...
  3. 3.toltolan mga panluwas na takod philatlas com philippine standard geographic code local governance pe...

Context Size 4:

  1. 1.mga panluwas na takod agi agi kan kawat na scrabblre kinua 06 11 16 mga bagay bagay dapit sa
  2. 2.toltolan mga panluwas na takod si iu sa universal music japan koreanong artista
  3. 3.igwa ining sukol na 173 70 kilometro kwadrado na kadagaan asin namumugtak sa ikaduwang distrito an d...

Generated Text Samples (Subword-based)

Below are text samples generated from each subword-based Markov chain model:

Context Size 1:

  1. 1._c_naco'a_nimgho
  2. 2.asinarosy_sig-em
  3. 3.n,_kursud_wanari

Context Size 2:

  1. 1.anta_pincion_they
  2. 2.a_cagkan_kabong_i
  3. 3.n_an_kahabaharopi

Context Size 3:

  1. 1.an_sa_laog,_asin_l
  2. 2._na_at_sa_unra_san
  3. 3._sa_na_lugang_nin_

Context Size 4:

  1. 1._sa_kastian_communi
  2. 2._na_dormasya_sa_pag
  3. 3.kan_iban.[3]_an_sa_

Key Findings

  • Best Predictability: Context-4 (word) with 95.0% predictability
  • Branching Factor: Decreases with context size (more deterministic)
  • Memory Trade-off: Larger contexts require more storage (465,409 contexts)
  • Recommendation: Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation

4. Vocabulary Analysis

[image]

[image]

[image]

Statistics

MetricValue
Vocabulary Size132,282
Total Tokens5,940,352
Mean Frequency44.91
Median Frequency4
Frequency Std Dev1779.06

Most Common Words

RankWordFrequency
1sa339,632
2na337,250
3an230,137
4kan225,822
5mga168,493
6nin132,058
7asin125,726
8sarong62,546
9si54,313
10the42,923

Least Common Words (from vocabulary)

RankWordFrequency
1akkuly2
2sucuk2
3zhaparova2
4altynbekov2
5wanatabe2
6kordon2
7sobringaran2
8khanid2
9ganish2
10niceno2

Zipf's Law Analysis

MetricValue
Zipf Coefficient1.0205
R² (Goodness of Fit)0.994695
Adherence Qualityexcellent

Coverage Analysis

Top N WordsCoverage
Top 10043.3%
Top 1,00063.7%
Top 5,00079.4%
Top 10,00085.4%

Key Findings

  • Zipf Compliance: R²=0.9947 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law
  • High Frequency Dominance: Top 100 words cover 43.3% of corpus
  • Long Tail: 122,282 words needed for remaining 14.6% coverage

5. Word Embeddings Evaluation

[image]

[image]

[image]

[image]

5.1 Cross-Lingual Alignment

[image]

[image]

5.2 Model Comparison

ModelDimensionIsotropySemantic DensityAlignment R@1Alignment R@10
mono_32d320.82470.3483N/AN/A
mono_64d640.82380.2714N/AN/A
mono_128d1280.80940.1968N/AN/A
aligned_32d320.8247 🏆0.34940.22800.5780
aligned_64d640.82380.26930.37000.7100
aligned_128d1280.80940.19770.47800.8080

Key Findings

  • Best Isotropy: aligned_32d with 0.8247 (more uniform distribution)
  • Semantic Density: Average pairwise similarity of 0.2722. Lower values indicate better semantic separation.
  • Alignment Quality: Aligned models achieve up to 47.8% 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

MetricValueInterpretationRecommendation
Productivity Index5.000High morphological productivityReliable analysis
Idiomaticity Gap-0.162Low 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
PrefixExamples
-papagraranggo, pandapog, pananakop
-nanaquit, nagana, nagmamato
-mamaghelang, malos, mangyans
-pagpagraranggo, pagrehistro, pagsasalin
-pipigrorokyaw, pigsaladawan, pigpapainitan
-nagnagana, nagmamato, nagashino
-kakajaman, kalipunan, kambodya
Productive Suffixes
SuffixExamples
-npigsaladawan, pigpapainitan, esperidion
-asmegma, emanuela, estrela
-ngmaghelang, gyalwang, gansing
-anpigsaladawan, pigpapainitan, kajaman
-onesperidion, pasteurization, oryentasyon
-ongsilensyong, mapabulong, otong
-angmaghelang, gyalwang, tatabang

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.

StemCohesionSubstitutabilityExamples
agka1.94x108 contextspagka, nagka, magka
inak2.14x67 contextsinakô, inaka, inakò
atio2.24x51 contextsratio, patio, matios
syon2.04x72 contextsmosyon, nasyon, losyon
agpa1.87x88 contextsragpa, agpay, magpa
hili2.23x39 contextshilig, chili, hilir
asyo2.00x57 contextsbasyo, rasyo, nasyo
ista1.67x114 contextsistar, bista, istat
ndan1.73x78 contextsindan, ndang, andan
agin1.84x44 contextssagin, magin, nagin
nagp2.05x26 contextsnagpe, nagpa, nagpur
embr2.14x22 contextsmembro, embryo, myembro

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.

PrefixSuffixFrequencyExamples
-pi-n77 wordspinagkukuanan, pinagkakaputan
-pa-n75 wordspaluan, painiton
-ka-n75 wordskakagaton, katangaan
-na-a74 wordsnagbabareta, nagsaranga
-pi-an72 wordspinagkukuanan, pinagkakaputan
-pa-a67 wordspamareta, padilla
-ka-an67 wordskatangaan, kagadanan
-na-n66 wordsnaiisihan, nahaman
-ma-a64 wordsmanusela, mababareta
-na-an56 wordsnaiisihan, nahaman

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).

WordSuggested SplitConfidenceStem
pinakamalumoy`pi-na-ka-ma-lumoy`9.0lumoy
pinakamakosog`pi-na-ka-ma-kosog`9.0kosog
pinakagrabeng`pi-na-ka-grabe-ng`9.0grabe
pinakaposibleng`pi-na-ka-posible-ng`9.0posible
pinakadarakula`pi-na-ka-darakula`7.5darakula
pagpapasakit`pag-pa-pa-sakit`7.5sakit
nakakasakop`na-ka-ka-sakop`7.5sakop
nakakahimo`na-ka-ka-himo`7.5himo
pinakasikat`pi-na-ka-sikat`7.5sikat
nakakalihis`na-ka-ka-lihis`7.5lihis
pagkakamukna`pag-ka-ka-mukna`7.5mukna
nagpapaluwas`nag-pa-pa-luwas`7.5luwas
pinakaligtas`pi-na-ka-ligtas`7.5ligtas
nagpapamidbid`nag-pa-pa-midbid`7.5midbid
nakakalayog`na-ka-ka-layog`7.5layog

6.6 Linguistic Interpretation

Automated Insight:

The language Central Bikol 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

[image]

Production Recommendations

ComponentRecommendedRationale
Tokenizer64k BPEBest compression (4.81x)
N-gram2-gramLowest perplexity (215)
MarkovContext-4Highest predictability (95.0%)
Embeddings100dBalanced 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. 1.Compare within model families: Metrics are most meaningful when comparing models of the same type (e.g., 8k vs 64k tokenizer).
  2. 2.Consider trade-offs: Better performance on one metric often comes at the cost of another (e.g., compression vs. OOV rate).
  3. 3.Context matters: Optimal values depend on downstream tasks. Text generation may prioritize different metrics than classification.
  4. 4.Corpus influence: All metrics are influenced by corpus characteristics. Wikipedia text differs from social media or literature.
  5. 5.Language-specific patterns: Morphologically rich languages (like Arabic) may show different optimal ranges than analytic languages.

Visualizations Index

VisualizationDescription
Tokenizer CompressionCompression ratios by vocabulary size
Tokenizer FertilityAverage token length by vocabulary
Tokenizer OOVUnknown token rates
Tokenizer Total TokensTotal tokens by vocabulary
N-gram PerplexityPerplexity by n-gram size
N-gram EntropyEntropy by n-gram size
N-gram CoverageTop pattern coverage
N-gram UniqueUnique n-gram counts
Markov EntropyEntropy by context size
Markov BranchingBranching factor by context
Markov ContextsUnique context counts
Zipf's LawFrequency-rank distribution with fit
Vocab FrequencyWord frequency distribution
Top 20 WordsMost frequent words
Vocab CoverageCumulative coverage curve
Embedding IsotropyVector space uniformity
Embedding NormsVector magnitude distribution
Embedding SimilarityWord similarity heatmap
Nearest NeighborsSimilar words for key terms
t-SNE Words2D word embedding visualization
t-SNE Sentences2D sentence embedding visualization
Position EncodingEncoding method comparison
Model SizesStorage requirements
Performance DashboardComprehensive 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](https://wikilangs.org) - Open-source NLP models for every Wikipedia language.

Maintainer

Omar Kamali - Omneity Labs

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

Report Date: 2026-01-03 18:57:54