Unsupervised rhyme recognition across multiple languages: training data size, human agreement, and linguistic differences

Abstract Rhyme is deceptively intuitive: what is or is not a rhyme is constructed historically, scholars struggle with rhyme classification, and people disagree on whether two words are rhymed or not. This complicates automated rhymed recognition and evaluation, especially in cross-language research contexts. This article investigates how much training data are needed for reliable unsupervised rhyme recognition using RhymeTagger, a language-independent tool that identifies rhymes based on repeating patterns in poetry corpora. We evaluate its performance across seven languages (Czech, German, English, French, Italian, Russian, and Slovene), examining how training size and language differences affect accuracy. To set a realistic performance benchmark, we assess inter-annotator agreement on a manually annotated subset of poems and analyze factors contributing to disagreement in expert annotations: phonetic similarity between rhyming words and their distance from each other in a poem. We also compare RhymeTagger to three large language models (LLMs) using a one-shot learning strategy. Our findings show that, once provided with sufficient training data, RhymeTagger consistently outperforms human agreement, while LLMs lacking phonetic representation significantly struggle with the task.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities
Published
2026-07-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqag098
Primary Topic
Authorship Attribution and Profiling
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Unsupervised rhyme recognition across multiple languages: training data size, human agreement, and linguistic differences

Artjoms Šeļa, Robert Kolář, Antonina Martynenko, Ben Nagy et al.
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities
Authorship Attribution and Profiling
article

Unsupervised rhyme recognition across multiple languages: training data size, human agreement, and linguistic differences

Artjoms Šeļa, Robert Kolář, Antonina Martynenko, Ben Nagy, Silvie Cinková, Lara Nugues, Neža Kočnik, Petr Plecháč, Mirella De Sisto, Luca Giovannini
article en

Abstract

Abstract Rhyme is deceptively intuitive: what is or is not a rhyme is constructed historically, scholars struggle with rhyme classification, and people disagree on whether two words are rhymed or not. This complicates automated rhymed recognition and evaluation, especially in cross-language research contexts. This article investigates how much training data are needed for reliable unsupervised rhyme recognition using RhymeTagger, a language-independent tool that identifies rhymes based on repeating patterns in poetry corpora. We evaluate its performance across seven languages (Czech, German, English, French, Italian, Russian, and Slovene), examining how training size and language differences affect accuracy. To set a realistic performance benchmark, we assess inter-annotator agreement on a manually annotated subset of poems and analyze factors contributing to disagreement in expert annotations: phonetic similarity between rhyming words and their distance from each other in a poem. We also compare RhymeTagger to three large language models (LLMs) using a one-shot learning strategy. Our findings show that, once provided with sufficient training data, RhymeTagger consistently outperforms human agreement, while LLMs lacking phonetic representation significantly struggle with the task.

Digital Scholarship in the Humanities
Center for Applied Linguistics (US), University of Potsdam (DE), University of Basel (CH), Tilburg University (NL), University of Maribor (SI), The Institute of the Polish Language of the Polish Academy of Sciences (PL), Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Czech Literature (CZ), Institute of Nature Conservation (PL), Polish Academy of Sciences (PL)
Grantová Agentura České Republiky
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Authorship Attribution and Profiling
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.