← Latest papers
💬 NLP

Naamah: A Large Scale Synthetic Sanskrit NER Corpus via DBpedia Seeding and LLM Generation

This paper introduces Naamah, a large-scale synthetic Sanskrit Named Entity Recognition corpus of over 100,000 sentences generated by combining DBpedia entity extraction with a 24B parameter hybrid reasoning model, which is then used to benchmark multilingual and Indic-specific transformer architectures.

Original authors: Akhil Rajeev P, Annarao Kulkarni

Published 2026-04-30
📖 4 min read☕ Coffee break read

Original authors: Akhil Rajeev P, Annarao Kulkarni

Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer

Imagine you have a massive, ancient library of Sanskrit books. These books are full of names of gods, kings, cities, and organizations. To teach a computer to understand these books, you need to show it thousands of examples where these names are highlighted and labeled (like "This is a person," "This is a place").

The problem? No one has written those labels yet. Manually reading and labeling these ancient texts is like trying to find a needle in a haystack while wearing blindfolds; it takes experts years and costs a fortune.

This paper introduces a solution called Naamah (named after a figure in Sanskrit literature, though the paper doesn't explicitly explain the name's meaning, it serves as the project's title). Here is how they built it and what they found, explained simply:

1. The Recipe: How They Made the Data

Instead of hiring humans to label books, the authors built a "robot chef" to cook up the data.

  • The Ingredients (DBpedia): They started with a giant digital encyclopedia called DBpedia. They pulled out a list of real names—people, places, and organizations. To make sure the robot didn't just memorize famous names, they mixed in modern foreign names (like "Giacomo Libera") written in Sanskrit script. This forced the computer to learn the rules of Sanskrit grammar, not just recognize famous faces.
  • The Chef (The AI Model): They used a very smart, 24-billion-parameter AI model (a "hybrid reasoning model") specifically trained to understand Indian languages.
  • The Cooking Process: Instead of forcing the AI to use rigid, pre-written sentence templates (like "Rama went to the forest"), they asked the AI to naturally weave these names into sentences. This allowed the AI to generate thousands of unique, grammatically correct sentences where the names appeared in different grammatical forms (which is very common in Sanskrit).
  • The Quality Control: They ran the output through a filter to catch obvious mistakes. The result? 102,942 sentences of "silver standard" data. "Silver" means it's not perfect (like gold), but it's high-quality enough to train a computer effectively.

2. The Experiment: Two Different Students

To test if this new dataset worked, they taught two different computer models to find these names:

  1. The Giant Multilingual Student (XLM-RoBERTa): This is a massive model that speaks many languages. It's like a student who has read a little bit of everything but isn't a specialist in Sanskrit.
  2. The Compact Specialist (IndicBERTv2): This is a smaller, lighter model specifically designed for Indian languages. It's like a student who has spent their whole life studying the specific dialects and scripts of the region.

3. The Results: Size Isn't Everything

When they tested both students on the new dataset, the Specialist (IndicBERTv2) won, even though it was much smaller.

  • The Score: The Specialist got a score of 0.96, while the Giant Multilingual Student got 0.95.
  • The Real Reason (The "Fracture" Problem): The paper found a fascinating reason why the Giant lost. Sanskrit words often stick together like glue (a feature called sandhi).
    • Imagine the word for "in Kurukshetra" is one long, fused word.
    • The Specialist saw the whole word and correctly said, "This is a Place."
    • The Giant tried to chop the word into pieces because its dictionary wasn't built for Sanskrit. It saw the first part as a "Place" but the tiny ending part as a separate, confusing word, which it wrongly guessed was an "Organization."

The Analogy: It's like trying to read a sentence where the spaces between words have been erased. The Specialist knows the language well enough to guess where the words break. The Giant, used to English spaces, gets confused and splits the words in the wrong places, leading to mistakes.

4. The Takeaway

The paper concludes that for ancient, complex languages like Sanskrit:

  • Synthetic data works: You can use AI to generate training data if you do it carefully, saving the need for thousands of hours of manual human labeling.
  • The right tool matters more than the biggest tool: A smaller model that understands the specific script and grammar of the language (IndicBERTv2) performed better than a giant, generic model (XLM-RoBERTa) because it didn't break the words apart incorrectly.

In short, they built a massive, AI-generated training manual for Sanskrit name-finding, and they proved that a specialized, smaller computer brain is better at reading this ancient language than a giant, generic one.

Drowning in papers in your field?

Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.

Try Digest →