Papers › Evaluating Various Tokenizers for Arabic Text Classification
Evaluating Various Tokenizers for Arabic Text Classification
Zaid Alyafeai, Maged S. Al-shaibani, Mustafa Ghaleb, Irfan Ahmad
The first step in any NLP pipeline is to split the text into individual tokens. The most obvious and straightforward approach is to use words as tokens. However, given a large text corpus, representing all the words is not efficient in terms of vocabulary size. In the literature, many tokenization algorithms have emerged to tackle this problem by creating subwords which in turn limits the vocabulary size in a given text corpus. Most tokenization techniques are language-agnostic i.e they don't incorporate the linguistic features of a given language. Not to mention the difficulty of evaluating such techniques in practice. In this paper, we introduce three new tokenization algorithms for Arabic and compare them to three other baselines using unsupervised evaluations. In addition to that, we compare all the six algorithms by evaluating them on three supervised classification tasks which are sentiment analysis, news classification and poetry classification using six publicly available datasets. Our experiments show that none of the tokenization technique is the best choice overall and that the performance of a given tokenization algorithm depends on the size of the dataset, type of the task, and the amount of morphology that exists in the dataset. However, some tokenization techniques are better overall as compared to others on various text classification tasks.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections