Adapting Small Language Models to Romanized Nepali: Tokenizer Fertility, Reference Likelihood, and Generation Metrics
원문 초록
Romanized Nepali, Nepali written in Latin script, is common in digital communication but has no standard spelling and few resources, and it is unclear how reliably small open language models can be adapted to it. We adapt three 2-3B base models from different families, Llama-3.2-3B, Qwen2.5-3B, and Gemma-2-2B, with QLoRA on 9,000 instruction examples produced by deterministic transliteration of Nepali instruction data. Each model is trained with one shared recipe and three seeds and evaluated on 1,000 held-out examples with reference-overlap metrics, byte-normalized reference likelihood (bits per byte, BPB), and an output audit, against zero-shot baselines under two prompts. Fine-tuning raises chrF++ from 10-14 to 29.0-30.6 and lowers BPB from 2.23-2.41 to 0.78-0.84; most zero-shot outputs (54-92%) are English-like. Likelihood and overlap disagree on how far apart the models are. Llama-3.2-3B has the lowest BPB in every seed, 0.042 below Qwen2.5-3B (95% CI 0.039-0.046), yet the two cannot be separated on chrF++ (30.51 and 30.61) or BLEU, even with paired item-level tests. Gemma-2-2B, whose tokenizer splits Romanized Nepali words least (2.72 tokens per word), scores worst on every measure. Which model gains most over its zero-shot baseline depends on the zero-shot prompt. In a supplementary comparison with an identical tokenizer, Llama-3.1-8B lowers BPB by 0.053 (0.050-0.056) relative to Llama-3.2-3B, while chrF++ and BLEU rise by only 0.68 and 0.58 points. Lower fertility and higher reference likelihood therefore did not identify the model whose outputs were closest to the references.
제출 이력
확인된 버전만 표시합니다. 전체 제출 이력은 arXiv 원문에서 확인하세요.
- arXiv:2611.12628v1제출 시각 미확인
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
공통 태그로 연결된 공개 논문이 아직 없습니다.
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.