Enhancing Sindhi Word Segmentation Using Subword Representation Learning and Position-Aware Self-Attention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sindhi word segmentation is a challenging task due to space omission and insertion issues. The Sindhi language itself adds to this complexity. It’s cursive and consists of characters with inherent joining and non-joining properties, independent of word boundaries. Existing Sindhi word segmentation methods rely on designing and combining hand-crafted features. However, these methods have limitations, such as difficulty handling out-of-vocabulary words, limited robustness for other languages, and inefficiency with large amounts of noisy or raw text. Neural network-based models, in contrast, can automatically capture word boundary information without requiring prior knowledge. In this paper, we propose a Subword-Guided Neural Word Segmenter (SGNWS) that addresses word segmentation as a sequence labeling task. The SGNWS model incorporates subword representation learning through a bidirectional long short-term memory encoder, position-aware self-attention, and a conditional random field. Our empirical results demonstrate that the SGNWS model achieves state-of-the-art performance in Sindhi word segmentation on six datasets.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".