Papers › On Evaluation of Bangla Word Analogies

On Evaluation of Bangla Word Analogies

10 Apr 2023arXiv:2304.04613archive 2025-07-28

Mousumi Akter, Souvika Sarkar, Shubhra Kanti Karmaker

This paper presents a high-quality dataset for evaluating the quality of Bangla word embeddings, which is a fundamental task in the field of Natural Language Processing (NLP). Despite being the 7th most-spoken language in the world, Bangla is a low-resource language and popular NLP models fail to perform well. Developing a reliable evaluation test set for Bangla word embeddings are crucial for benchmarking and guiding future research. We provide a Mikolov-style word analogy evaluation set specifically for Bangla, with a sample size of 16678, as well as a translated and curated version of the Mikolov dataset, which contains 10594 samples for cross-lingual research. Our experiments with different state-of-the-art embedding models reveal that Bangla has its own unique characteristics, and current embeddings for Bangla still struggle to achieve high accuracy on both datasets. We suggest that future research should focus on training models with larger datasets and considering the unique morphological characteristics of Bangla. This study represents the first step towards building a reliable NLP system for the Bangla language1.

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

11 samples harvested; 7 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 4 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-25; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 11 of the 11 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from facebookresearch/fastText. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Datasets

Introduced by this paper, per the archive.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

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