Building Corpora for Low-Resource Kenyan Languages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Natural Language Processing is a crucial frontier in artificial intelligence, with broad application across public health, agriculture, education, and commerce. However, due to the lack of substantial linguistic resources, many African languages remain underrepresented in this digital transformation. This article presents a case study on the development of linguistic corpora for three under-resourced Kenyan languages, Kidaw’ida, Kalenjin, and Dholuo, with the aim of advancing natural language processing and linguistic research in African communities. Our project, which lasted one year,employed a selective crowd-sourcing methodology to collect text and speech data from native speakers of these languages. Data collection involved (1) recording and transcribing conver-sations and translating the resulting text into Kiswahili, creating parallel corpora, and (2) reading and recording written texts to generate speech corpora. We made these resourcesfreely accessible on open-research platforms, namely Zenodo for the parallel text corpora and Mozilla Common Voice for the speech datasets, thereby facilitating ongoing contributions anddeveloper access to train models and develop Natural Language Processing applications.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.007 |
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".