CoolFace
Modelpublic

wikilangs/ilo

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

Iloko - Wikilangs Models

Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study

This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on Iloko 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
8k3.747x3.750.1290%366,711
16k4.060x4.060.1397%338,491
32k4.334x4.340.1492%317,024
64k4.543x 🏆4.550.1564%302,462

Tokenization Examples

Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size:

Sample 1: Ti tawen idi ket kadawyan a tawen a nangrugi iti Martes (iparang ti silpo ti nap...

VocabTokensCount
8k▁ti ▁tawen ▁idi ▁ket ▁kadawyan ▁a ▁tawen ▁a ▁nangrugi ▁iti ... (+19 more)29
16k▁ti ▁tawen ▁idi ▁ket ▁kadawyan ▁a ▁tawen ▁a ▁nangrugi ▁iti ... (+19 more)29
32k▁ti ▁tawen ▁idi ▁ket ▁kadawyan ▁a ▁tawen ▁a ▁nangrugi ▁iti ... (+19 more)29
64k▁ti ▁tawen ▁idi ▁ket ▁kadawyan ▁a ▁tawen ▁a ▁nangrugi ▁iti ... (+19 more)29

Sample 2: Ti tawen idi ket kadawyan a tawen a nangrugi iti Domingo (iparang ti silpo ti na...

VocabTokensCount
8k▁ti ▁tawen ▁idi ▁ket ▁kadawyan ▁a ▁tawen ▁a ▁nangrugi ▁iti ... (+19 more)29
16k▁ti ▁tawen ▁idi ▁ket ▁kadawyan ▁a ▁tawen ▁a ▁nangrugi ▁iti ... (+19 more)29
32k▁ti ▁tawen ▁idi ▁ket ▁kadawyan ▁a ▁tawen ▁a ▁nangrugi ▁iti ... (+19 more)29
64k▁ti ▁tawen ▁idi ▁ket ▁kadawyan ▁a ▁tawen ▁a ▁nangrugi ▁iti ... (+19 more)29

Sample 3: Ti tawen idi ket kadawyan a tawen a nangrugi iti Domingo (iparang ti silpo ti na...

VocabTokensCount
8k▁ti ▁tawen ▁idi ▁ket ▁kadawyan ▁a ▁tawen ▁a ▁nangrugi ▁iti ... (+19 more)29
16k▁ti ▁tawen ▁idi ▁ket ▁kadawyan ▁a ▁tawen ▁a ▁nangrugi ▁iti ... (+19 more)29
32k▁ti ▁tawen ▁idi ▁ket ▁kadawyan ▁a ▁tawen ▁a ▁nangrugi ▁iti ... (+19 more)29
64k▁ti ▁tawen ▁idi ▁ket ▁kadawyan ▁a ▁tawen ▁a ▁nangrugi ▁iti ... (+19 more)29

Key Findings

  • Best Compression: 64k achieves 4.543x compression
  • Lowest UNK Rate: 8k with 0.1290% 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-gramWord9,67113.2449,47118.3%45.5%
2-gramSubword205 🏆7.683,75874.6%99.5%
3-gramWord23,41514.5290,86312.7%32.8%
3-gramSubword1,53410.5827,77735.7%77.2%
4-gramWord42,39415.37148,45211.4%27.1%
4-gramSubword7,32412.84148,84521.9%51.1%
5-gramWord29,78914.86103,80712.6%30.6%
5-gramSubword21,34714.38384,74915.0%38.4%

Top 5 N-grams by Size

2-grams (Word):

RankN-gramCount
1dagiti nagibasaran11,555
2maysa a10,904
3ket ti10,192
4a kas9,434
5daytoy ket8,282

3-grams (Word):

RankN-gramCount
1akinruar a silpo7,499
2dagiti akinruar a7,494
3dagiti nagibasaran dagiti4,617
4nagibasaran dagiti akinruar4,453
5ket maysa a3,557

4-grams (Word):

RankN-gramCount
1dagiti akinruar a silpo7,484
2nagibasaran dagiti akinruar a4,453
3dagiti nagibasaran dagiti akinruar4,434
4mula iti pamilia ti2,523
5ket ti sebbangan ti2,099

5-grams (Word):

RankN-gramCount
1nagibasaran dagiti akinruar a silpo4,449
2dagiti nagibasaran dagiti akinruar a4,434
3demograpia dagiti nagibasaran dagiti akinruar1,659
4ti mula iti pamilia ti1,601
5sebbangan ti mula iti pamilia1,520

2-grams (Subword):

RankN-gramCount
1a _526,058
2i _499,068
3t i477,610
4_ a378,705
5a n376,214

3-grams (Subword):

RankN-gramCount
1t i _426,029
2_ a _234,251
3_ t i225,448
4i t i197,634
5a n _128,518

4-grams (Subword):

RankN-gramCount
1_ t i _218,539
2i t i _190,580
3_ i t i103,474
4a g i t91,630
5d a g i91,219

5-grams (Subword):

RankN-gramCount
1_ i t i _102,341
2d a g i t90,946
3a g i t i87,738
4g i t i _87,510
5_ k e t _71,576

Key Findings

  • Best Perplexity: 2-gram (subword) with 205
  • Entropy Trend: Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable)
  • Coverage: Top-1000 patterns cover ~38% of corpus
  • Recommendation: 4-gram or 5-gram for best predictive performance

3. Markov Chain Evaluation

[image]

[image]

[image]

Results

ContextVariantAvg EntropyPerplexityBranching FactorUnique ContextsPredictability
1Word0.75611.6894.87138,79424.4%
1Subword0.81991.7655.062,63618.0%
2Word0.31251.2421.94673,93468.7%
2Subword0.71221.6384.4513,33728.8%
3Word0.14951.1091.341,305,89685.0%
3Subword0.78261.7204.1759,34121.7%
4Word0.0702 🏆1.0501.121,742,66893.0%
4Subword0.70281.6283.04247,60229.7%

Generated Text Samples (Word-based)

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

Context Size 1:

  1. 1.a pagbeddengan ti madang ti gunglo ti limba românăroronrum ron langeveld ti sistema sistema ti punto
  2. 2.ti pagsasao a mangiada ti turko nga antenada ken ti habitat dagiti nagibasaran triandra kadawyan iti
  3. 3.iti bukel kalapsan ti populasionna maysa kadagiti bukodda nga idi pimmusay otto warburg e daytoy ket

Context Size 2:

  1. 1.dagiti nagibasaran dagiti akinruar a silpo opisial a pagurasan ti nagbanagan daytoy a panagusar iti ...
  2. 2.maysa a maika 3 a klase nga ili iti probinsia ti cebu ket isu idi idiay estados
  3. 3.ket ti siudad ti tsina bagi ti ioc ti rambakan nga aldaw a kalendario iti kalendario a

Context Size 3:

  1. 1.dagiti akinruar a silpo ili ti quirino ti maddela nagtipunan cabarroguis aglipay ken diffun kaaduan ...
  2. 2.akinruar a silpo naenara opisial a portal ti gobierno opisial a sitio ti turismo ti karabakh siudad ...
  3. 3.dagiti nagibasaran dagiti akinruar a silpo siudad ti mehiko ciudad de méxico ken ti maika 7 a meridi...

Context Size 4:

  1. 1.dagiti akinruar a silpo directory of current japanese city leaders and outline of system japans evol...
  2. 2.nagibasaran dagiti akinruar a silpo website ti siudad ti san pablo siudad ti san pedro population 57...
  3. 3.dagiti nagibasaran dagiti akinruar a silpo opisial a website ti andaman ken nicobar grupo ti etniko ...

Generated Text Samples (Subword-based)

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

Context Size 1:

  1. 1.a;_mangima_saket
  2. 2._ril,_ng_ka-a_na
  3. 3.ikaba_kerapipa_m

Context Size 2:

  1. 1.a_aca_a_mūrīshimb
  2. 2.i_ngpo_ket_da_kam
  3. 3.ti_a_demics._mawe

Context Size 3:

  1. 1.ti_kaman_zimbahnam
  2. 2._a_heogress:_annak
  3. 3._ti_dagiti_filia_h

Context Size 4:

  1. 1._ti_dua_nga_engling
  2. 2.iti_agarup_a_karaka
  3. 3._iti_karl_edisiesto

Key Findings

  • Best Predictability: Context-4 (word) with 93.0% predictability
  • Branching Factor: Decreases with context size (more deterministic)
  • Memory Trade-off: Larger contexts require more storage (247,602 contexts)
  • Recommendation: Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation

4. Vocabulary Analysis

[image]

[image]

[image]

Statistics

MetricValue
Vocabulary Size60,623
Total Tokens2,400,884
Mean Frequency39.60
Median Frequency4
Frequency Std Dev1521.44

Most Common Words

RankWordFrequency
1a237,485
2ti233,421
3iti103,626
4ket71,830
5dagiti62,492
6nga53,917
7ken48,636
8kadagiti24,755
9idi21,971
10maysa16,740

Least Common Words (from vocabulary)

RankWordFrequency
1mainom2
2epektoda2
3medulla2
4nainom2
5pannakarimon2
6kannabinoide2
7agsarsarua2
8alingget2
9emetopilia2
10emetopobia2

Zipf's Law Analysis

MetricValue
Zipf Coefficient1.0920
R² (Goodness of Fit)0.998298
Adherence Qualityexcellent

Coverage Analysis

Top N WordsCoverage
Top 10053.3%
Top 1,00074.1%
Top 5,00086.4%
Top 10,00091.0%

Key Findings

  • Zipf Compliance: R²=0.9983 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law
  • High Frequency Dominance: Top 100 words cover 53.3% of corpus
  • Long Tail: 50,623 words needed for remaining 9.0% 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_32d320.8576 🏆0.3336N/AN/A
mono_64d640.80490.2671N/AN/A
mono_128d1280.65660.2245N/AN/A
aligned_32d320.85760.33270.10200.4140
aligned_64d640.80490.26870.19400.5560
aligned_128d1280.65660.23220.24400.6020

Key Findings

  • Best Isotropy: mono_32d with 0.8576 (more uniform distribution)
  • Semantic Density: Average pairwise similarity of 0.2765. Lower values indicate better semantic separation.
  • Alignment Quality: Aligned models achieve up to 24.4% 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

MetricValueInterpretationRecommendation
Productivity Index5.000High morphological productivityReliable analysis
Idiomaticity Gap-0.203Low 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
-mamagnificent, matapos, mackinven
-aabc, annonaceae, agtengtenggel
-ssaklawen, segregate, sinaugoro
-nanaipagpagarup, naipabaro, na2o
-papagsasaoe, pait, pannakamatmati
-bbasle, bisitaen, begawan
-kakatres, kalidasa, kababa
-ppisinniflora, pagsasaoe, puesto
Productive Suffixes
SuffixExamples
-acuria, pisinniflora, daremdemda
-nsaklawen, positron, tatalan
-okodigo, naipabaro, puesto
-skatres, matapos, oxus
-antatalan, begawan, tinwtawagan
-nalehitimadona, pinarmekna, arrubayanna
-eme, rourke, pagsasaoe
-gtemburong, dulong, aliping

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
angi1.91x71 contextsangin, mangi, sangi
dayt2.60x17 contextsdayty, dayta, dayto
sion1.93x43 contextspasion, bision, sesion
asao2.34x20 contextsmasao, sasao, wasao
adag2.23x21 contextsnadag, adaga, kadagit
ngga1.78x42 contextsingga, anggal, rongga
agsa1.61x53 contextsagsao, agsapa, bagsak
aipa1.65x41 contextsnaipa, maipa, taipa
aika1.76x29 contextsmaika, baikal, taikat
abag1.76x27 contextstabag, abaga, kabag
abae1.92x20 contextsbabae, babaen, ababaen
silp2.05x16 contextssilpo, isilpo, insilpo

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
-na-n142 wordsnaminduan, nailawlawagan
-pa-n123 wordspasuruan, patubuan
-pa-a122 wordspannakakita, pagsinaenna
-a-a117 wordsagrepresenta, agdumaduma
-na-a108 wordsnaipatulodda, nailata
-na-an105 wordsnaminduan, nailawlawagan
-s-a98 wordssinasina, sanana
-pa-an97 wordspasuruan, patubuan
-b-a85 wordsbiskleta, bella
-ma-a83 wordsmalabarica, maipanunotanda

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
kalatakanna`kalatak-an-na`7.5an
manggandat`manggan-da-t`7.5da
matarigagay`matariga-g-ay`7.5g
cavacoana`cavaco-an-a`7.5an
nagunggunaan`nagunggu-na-an`7.5na
gungunana`gungun-an-a`7.5an
khoonmengiana`khoonmengi-an-a`7.5an
kutubuano`kutubu-an-o`7.5an
resultana`result-an-a`7.5an
pransiskano`pransisk-an-o`7.5an
stephanus`steph-an-us`7.5an
tanghalan`tangh-al-an`7.5al
mabaeoides`mabaeoi-d-es`7.5d
kabasalan`kabas-al-an`7.5al
binukbukodanna`binukbukod-an-na`7.5an

6.6 Linguistic Interpretation

Automated Insight:

The language Iloko 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 (4.54x)
N-gram2-gramLowest perplexity (205)
MarkovContext-4Highest predictability (93.0%)
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: 2026-01-10 04:17:29