Southern Altai - Wikilangs Models

Comprehensive Research Report & Full Ablation Study

This repository contains NLP models trained and evaluated by Wikilangs, specifically on Southern Altai 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
• 2. N-gram Model Evaluation
• 3. Markov Chain Evaluation
• 4. Vocabulary Analysis
• 5. Word Embeddings Evaluation
• 6. Morphological Analysis (Experimental)
• 7. Summary & Recommendations
• Metrics Glossary
• Visualizations Index

---

1. Tokenizer Evaluation

Results

Vocab Size	Compression	Avg Token Len	UNK Rate	Total Tokens
8k	3.486x	3.49	0.3992%	972,913
16k	3.686x 🏆	3.69	0.4221%	920,240

Tokenization Examples

Below are sample sentences tokenized with each vocabulary size:

Sample 1: Оҥныут кошуун () — ӧвӧр моҥолдыҥ кошуун. Этимологиязы Оҥныут — (калка моҥолдоп о...

Vocab	Tokens	Count
8k	▁оҥныут ▁кошуун ▁() ▁— ▁ӧвӧр ▁моҥолдыҥ ▁кошуун . ▁этимологиязы ▁оҥныут ... (+27 more)	37
16k	▁оҥныут ▁кошуун ▁() ▁— ▁ӧвӧр ▁моҥолдыҥ ▁кошуун . ▁этимологиязы ▁оҥныут ... (+25 more)	35

Sample 2: Эски Чечкаб (, ) — јурт Россияда Татарстан Республиканыҥ Кайбыч аймагында кирет....

Vocab	Tokens	Count
8k	▁эски ▁че ч ка б ▁(, ▁) ▁— ▁јурт ▁россияда ... (+12 more)	22
16k	▁эски ▁чечкаб ▁(, ▁) ▁— ▁јурт ▁россияда ▁татарстан ▁республиканыҥ ▁кайбыч ... (+7 more)	17

Sample 3: Танк - темирле јабылган тебингиштерлӱ јуучыл машина.

Vocab	Tokens	Count
8k	▁танк ▁- ▁темир ле ▁ја б ылган ▁тебин ги ш ... (+6 more)	16
16k	▁танк ▁- ▁темирле ▁јабылган ▁тебингиштерлӱ ▁јуучыл ▁машина .	8

Key Findings

• Best Compression: 16k achieves 3.686x compression
• Lowest UNK Rate: 8k with 0.3992% 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	4,423	12.11	11,976	16.5%	55.6%
2-gram	Subword	413 🏆	8.69	2,708	55.2%	98.2%
3-gram	Word	5,471	12.42	16,254	15.6%	52.1%
3-gram	Subword	3,292	11.68	22,428	19.5%	62.9%
4-gram	Word	8,010	12.97	27,702	15.3%	46.3%
4-gram	Subword	14,003	13.77	96,467	10.5%	35.7%
5-gram	Word	7,318	12.84	24,542	16.3%	46.7%
5-gram	Subword	33,559	15.03	198,894	7.1%	25.2%

Top 5 N-grams by Size

2-grams (Word):

Rank	N-gram	Count
1	республики алтай	1,479
2	ј чык	1,391
3	горно алтайск	1,246
4	алтай республиканыҥ	1,220
5	ј бож	1,072

3-grams (Word):

Rank	N-gram	Count
1	јылдыҥ ӱлӱрген айыныҥ	755
2	ӱлӱрген айыныҥ 15	730
3	алтайск ау ра	511
4	горно алтайск ау	511
5	јон јаткан јерлери	503

4-grams (Word):

Rank	N-gram	Count
1	јылдыҥ ӱлӱрген айыныҥ 15	730
2	горно алтайск ау ра	511
3	болгон јылдыҥ ӱлӱрген айыныҥ	367
4	айыныҥ 15 кӱнине јетире	365
5	аайынча јылдыҥ ӱлӱрген айыныҥ	365

5-grams (Word):

Rank	N-gram	Count
1	юлиан кӱнтизӱ аайынча јылдыҥ ӱлӱрген	365
2	кӱнтизӱ аайынча јылдыҥ ӱлӱрген айыныҥ	365
3	кӱнине јетире болгон јылдыҥ ӱлӱрген	365
4	юлиан кӱнтизӱни 13 кӱнге озолоп	365
5	кӱнтизӱ юлиан кӱнтизӱни 13 кӱнге	365

2-grams (Subword):

Rank	N-gram	Count
1	_ к	74,208
2	, _	64,571
3	_ ј	55,512
4	а _	55,147
5	ҥ _	53,924

3-grams (Subword):

Rank	N-gram	Count
1	ы ҥ _	34,158
2	д а _	16,990
3	_ — _	16,847
4	н ы ҥ	15,805
5	_ к а	15,039

4-grams (Subword):

Rank	N-gram	Count
1	н ы ҥ _	15,207
2	д ы ҥ _	13,173
3	_ к ӱ н	11,135
4	а л т а	9,624
5	_ ј ы л	9,304

5-grams (Subword):

Rank	N-gram	Count
1	а л т а й	8,736
2	_ ј ы л д	7,756
3	с к и й _	7,663
4	_ а л т а	6,748
5	й д ы ҥ _	5,904

Key Findings

• Best Perplexity: 2-gram (subword) with 413
• Entropy Trend: Decreases with larger n-grams (more predictable)
• Coverage: Top-1000 patterns cover ~25% 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	0.7265	1.655	4.23	64,260	27.4%
1	Subword	1.6376	3.112	16.04	301	0.0%
2	Word	0.1676	1.123	1.34	271,928	83.2%
2	Subword	1.3152	2.488	8.04	4,828	0.0%
3	Word	0.0551	1.039	1.10	364,496	94.5%
3	Subword	0.8837	1.845	4.16	38,825	11.6%
4	Word	0.0265 🏆	1.019	1.05	400,428	97.3%
4	Subword	0.6047	1.521	2.55	161,528	39.5%

Generated Text Samples (Word-based)

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

Context Size 1:

1. ла ӧскӧ кижиниҥ адын масс системы но строеніемъ мерзокъ всё спишет вермахт понёс 90 км јаш
2. ле јолдоры јуртта 9 кӱнинде москвада в в ломоносова јылда гаагада переплётчик бичиктер берестяная гр...
3. алтай республика хакасия монголия горно алтайск гагу ныҥ јарымјылдык курстарына аткарылган оныҥ адыл...

Context Size 2:

1. республики алтай от 3 марта года n 9 6 о языках народов проживающих на территории республики алтай
2. ј чык совет ле россий орнитолог јурукчы анималист бу кӱнде божогондор ајарулар 27 айдыҥ 27 кӱни юлиа...
3. горно алтайск алтайдыҥ бичиктер чыгарар изд возы 1 эл опт диск cd rom на алт яз б

Context Size 3:

1. јылдыҥ ӱлӱрген айыныҥ 15 кӱнинеҥ ала тулаан айдыҥ 29 кӱнинде артист россияныҥ театрал ишчилериниҥ би...
2. ӱлӱрген айыныҥ 15 кӱнинеҥ ала кандык айдыҥ 15 кӱни юлиан кӱнтизӱ аайынча јылдыҥ ӱлӱрген айыныҥ 15 кӱ...
3. алтайск ау ра литературно издательский дом алтын туу сууда балык кезем астаган да болзо корулу јерле...

Context Size 4:

1. јылдыҥ ӱлӱрген айыныҥ 15 кӱнине јетире болгон јылдыҥ ӱлӱрген айыныҥ 15 кӱнине јетире болгон јылдыҥ ӱ...
2. горно алтайск ау ра литературно издательский дом алтын туу јайдыҥ бойында аркалары койу ла бийик ӧлӧ...
3. болгон јылдыҥ ӱлӱрген айыныҥ 15 кӱнинеҥ ала кӱӱк айдыҥ 6 кӱни григориан кӱнтизӱде јылдыҥ 360 кӱни ви...

Generated Text Samples (Subword-based)

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

Context Size 1:

1. _гатӱли»)_јектич
2. аканамикет_јыхих
3. ртакклан_онла_бь

Context Size 2:

1. _кыл,_баснов_кылг
2. ,_29_21,97_малтал
3. _јуртиреспублик_а

Context Size 3:

1. ыҥ_кодондо_инфранс
2. да_православ_башка
3. _—_titus_liefs_asb

Context Size 4:

1. ныҥ_кандыра_агып_ба
2. дыҥ_физиканыҥ_ӱӱрел
3. _кӱнтизӱле_кӱни_гри

Key Findings

• Best Predictability: Context-4 (word) with 97.3% predictability
• Branching Factor: Decreases with context size (more deterministic)
• Memory Trade-off: Larger contexts require more storage (161,528 contexts)
• Recommendation: Context-3 or Context-4 for text generation

---

4. Vocabulary Analysis

Statistics

Metric	Value
Vocabulary Size	26,328
Total Tokens	565,164
Mean Frequency	21.47
Median Frequency	3
Frequency Std Dev	124.45

Most Common Words

Rank	Word	Frequency
1	ла	6,601
2	ле	4,964
3	алтай	4,646
4	деп	3,903
5	с	3,881
6	јылда	3,745
7	айдыҥ	3,441
8	болгон	3,230
9	км	3,151
10	јурт	3,140

Least Common Words (from vocabulary)

Rank	Word	Frequency
1	таскадуларды	2
2	туузаланат	2
3	узаныш	2
4	эрессейде	2
5	метеметике	2
6	јеткилдери	2
7	кӧмпӱтерлик	2
8	чоотош	2
9	кошлык	2
10	програмалары	2

Zipf's Law Analysis

Metric	Value
Zipf Coefficient	1.1627
R² (Goodness of Fit)	0.985919
Adherence Quality	excellent

Coverage Analysis

Top N Words	Coverage
Top 100	27.1%
Top 1,000	65.7%
Top 5,000	85.9%
Top 10,000	92.4%

Key Findings

• Zipf Compliance: R²=0.9859 indicates excellent adherence to Zipf's law
• High Frequency Dominance: Top 100 words cover 27.1% of corpus
• Long Tail: 16,328 words needed for remaining 7.6% 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	0.8419	0.3607	N/A	N/A
mono_64d	64	0.7375	0.3054	N/A	N/A
mono_128d	128	0.3603	0.2810	N/A	N/A
aligned_32d	32	0.8419 🏆	0.3554	0.0260	0.1460
aligned_64d	64	0.7375	0.2999	0.0660	0.2980
aligned_128d	128	0.3603	0.2823	0.1580	0.4340

Key Findings

• Best Isotropy: aligned_32d with 0.8419 (more uniform distribution)
• Semantic Density: Average pairwise similarity of 0.3141. Lower values indicate better semantic separation.
• Alignment Quality: Aligned models achieve up to 15.8% 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

Metric	Value	Interpretation	Recommendation
Productivity Index	5.000	High morphological productivity	Reliable analysis
Idiomaticity Gap	0.854	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
-ка	калькутта, калба, кацукава
-ко	контр, козерёкова, кожондоп

Productive Suffixes

Suffix	Examples
-ыҥ	филармонияныҥ, транспорттыҥ, британияныҥ
-ий	белорусский, макарьевский, исетский
-кий	белорусский, макарьевский, исетский
-ский	белорусский, макарьевский, исетский
-ныҥ	филармонияныҥ, британияныҥ, наралканыҥ
-иҥ	јеезезиниҥ, изӱзиниҥ, ӱренчиктердиҥ
-да	ордында, совхозында, садуда
-ый	государственный, музейный, тёплый

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
ский	2.17x	43 contexts	омский, окский, юрский
ында	1.53x	51 contexts	мында, айында, сындар
ыныҥ	1.68x	30 contexts	мыныҥ, зыныҥ, угыныҥ
лтай	1.85x	21 contexts	алтай, шылтай, алтайды
лгон	2.21x	12 contexts	толгон, болгон, болгонм
лган	1.70x	23 contexts	алган, калган, салган
осси	2.03x	13 contexts	россия, россию, россии
аныҥ	1.67x	23 contexts	оканыҥ, сшаныҥ, эраныҥ
олго	1.66x	22 contexts	колго, волго, голго
алта	1.49x	26 contexts	алтай, алтан, алтам
јылд	1.77x	15 contexts	јылда, јылды, јылдын
ылда	1.63x	19 contexts	тылда, дылда, јылда

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
-ка	-ыҥ	21 words	казакстанныҥ, кайырлыктыҥ
-ко	-ыҥ	20 words	конституцияныҥ, конкурстардыҥ
-ка	-ий	14 words	кадетский, карский
-ко	-ый	13 words	консалтинговый, командный
-ка	-ныҥ	11 words	казакстанныҥ, канаданыҥ
-ко	-ныҥ	11 words	конституцияныҥ, колхозыныҥ
-ко	-ий	10 words	комментарий, ковалевский
-ка	-кий	10 words	кадетский, карский
-ка	-ский	10 words	кадетский, карский
-ко	-да	9 words	косметологияда, коруда

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
планеталарында	планеталарын-да	4.5	планеталарын
актуруныҥ	актуру-ныҥ	4.5	актуру
покровский	покров-ский	4.5	покров
искусствоныҥ	искусство-ныҥ	4.5	искусство
думазыныҥ	думазы-ныҥ	4.5	думазы
медицинада	медицина-да	4.5	медицина
балдарыныҥ	балдары-ныҥ	4.5	балдары
португалияда	португалия-да	4.5	португалия
программада	программа-да	4.5	программа
аймагыныҥ	аймагы-ныҥ	4.5	аймагы
академияда	академия-да	4.5	академия
авиацияныҥ	авиация-ныҥ	4.5	авиация
шотландский	шотланд-ский	4.5	шотланд
киргизияныҥ	киргизия-ныҥ	4.5	киргизия
регрессияныҥ	регрессия-ныҥ	4.5	регрессия

6.6 Linguistic Interpretation

Automated Insight: The language Southern Altai 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	16k BPE	Best compression (3.69x)
N-gram	2-gram	Lowest perplexity (413)
Markov	Context-4	Highest predictability (97.3%)
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 - a monthly snapshot of Wikipedia articles across 300+ languages.

Project

A project by Wikilangs - Open-source NLP models for every Wikipedia language.

Maintainer

Omar Kamali - Omneity Labs

Citation

If you use these models in your research, please cite:

@misc{wikilangs2025,
  author = {Kamali, Omar},
  title = {Wikilangs: Open NLP Models for Wikipedia Languages},
  year = {2025},
  doi = {10.5281/zenodo.18073153},
  publisher = {Zenodo},
  url = {https://huggingface.co/wikilangs}
  institution = {Omneity Labs}
}

License

MIT License - Free for academic and commercial use.

Links

• 🌐 Website: wikilangs.org
• 🤗 Models: huggingface.co/wikilangs
• 📊 Data: wikipedia-monthly
• 👤 Author: Omar Kamali
• 🤝 Sponsor: Featherless AI

---

Generated by Wikilangs Models Pipeline

Report Date: 2026-01-03 16:17:03