Daily Papers

SiPaKosa is a comprehensive corpus of Sinhala and Pali doctrinal texts comprising approximately 786K sentences and 9.25M words, incorporating 16 copyright-cleared historical Buddhist documents alongside the complete web-scraped Tripitaka canonical texts. The corpus was created through high-quality OCR using Google Document AI on historical manuscripts, combined with systematic web scraping of canonical repositories, followed by rigorous quality control and metadata annotation. The corpus is organised into language-specific subcorpora: Sinhala and Mixed Sinhala-Pali. We evaluate the performance of language models using ten pretrained models, with perplexity scores ranging from 1.09 to 189.67 on our corpus. This analysis shows that proprietary models significantly outperform open-source alternatives by factors of three to six times. This corpus supports the pretraining of domain-adapted language models, facilitates historical language analysis, and aids in the development of information retrieval systems for Buddhist scholarship while preserving Sinhala cultural heritage.

We introduce Darshana Graph, a corpus of over 125,000 text records spanning classical Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain philosophical traditions, drawn from public-domain and openly licensed translations of sources including the Bhagavad Gita, Brahma Sutras, principal Upanishads, the Pali Canon, and core Jain texts. Its distinctive contribution lies in a structurally unique subset of roughly 8,500 Hindu and Jain records in which the same root verse or sutra is aligned across eighteen historical commentators representing five schools of Vedanta and other darshanas, enabling direct comparison of how independent interpretive traditions read identical source material. To our knowledge, no publicly available resource provides comparable cross-commentator alignment at this scale. We present two analyses built on this corpus. First, a transparent stylometric comparison requiring no machine learning measures argumentative style through scriptural citation density, explicit refutation rate, and sentence complexity. It finds a moderate negative correlation between citation density and refutation rate, a marked increase in refutation rate across three commentators in a related doctrinal lineage, and measurable genre-level differences within the Pali Canon itself. Second, we describe a constrained large language model pipeline that extracts typed philosophical relationships between concepts using a predefined relation vocabulary and deterministic post-hoc validation. The resulting graph surfaces cross-school disagreement patterns while also revealing important extraction limitations, including cases where an independent embedding-based analysis disagrees with the graph-derived findings. We release the full corpus, extracted relationship graph, and all source code.

We present a computational stylometric analysis of the Tipitaka across all three Pitakas in English translation, extending earlier work on the Sutta Pitaka alone. The corpus spans 134,831 segments from Bhikkhu Sujato's Sutta Pitaka (114,591 segments, CC0), Bhikkhu Brahmali's Vinaya Pitaka (7,923 segments, CC0 2026), I.B. Horner's 1938 Vinaya translation (2,826 segments), three English translations of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha compendium (2,077 segments), and cross-tradition Vinaya texts from the Dharmaguptaka and Mulasarvastivada schools. We compute Zipf rank-frequency distributions with OLS-fitted exponents, Moving Average TTR (MATTR-500), numeral-word density, and vocabulary overlap (Jaccard and Szymkiewicz-Simpson coefficients). Main findings: (1) all corpora show Zipf-consistent distributions (R2 > 0.989); the Vinaya is closest to ideal Zipf slope -1 and the Sangaha corpus deviates most, with 'consciousness' displacing grammatical particles at rank 8; (2) MATTR-500 shows the Sutta and Vinaya Theravada are nearly identical in lexical diversity (0.399 and 0.400), while the Sangaha corpus is genuinely more diverse (0.560), confirmed by size-controlled subsampling; (3) the Sangaha corpus has the highest numeral-word density (3.26%), consistent with its systematic enumeration of mental and material categories; (4) the Mulasarvastivada Vinaya shares 20.0% vocabulary (Jaccard) and 49.1% (overlap coefficient) with the Theravada Vinaya, reflecting shared legal heritage across two millennia; (5) two English translations of the same Vinaya source text share only 24.2% of their vocabulary across 88 years, with 'musing' versus 'absorption' for jhana and 'defeat' versus 'expulsion' for parajika as the most diagnostic shifts. All results are point estimates; no significance testing is conducted. Code and data are released as open-source extensions to the Darshana Graph corpus (arXiv:2606.18222).

Computational knowledge graphs assign philosophical concepts to traditions based on corpus frequency: the school that mentions a concept most becomes its attributed tradition. We argue this conflates three measurements: textual power, historical priority, and philosophical significance, demonstrated using the darshana-graph, a knowledge graph of 28,322 relationships across Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain traditions. Seven of the top 25 concepts by betweenness centrality predate their attributed school by 288 to 2,288 years. Moksha, attributed to Advaita Vedanta, appears first in Jain sources over 1,200 years earlier. The most reliable snapshot, at 300 BCE using only explicitly dated sources, shows a genuinely pluralistic structure: 59% Vedic, 24% Jain, 18% Buddhist. We also quantify a critical distortion in the temporal method: between 300 CE and 800 CE the network grows from 18 to 1,028 nodes, with 97.4% carrying Advaita proxy dates, revealing that apparent dominance reflects textual survival, not philosophical history. Beyond correcting attribution bias, the temporally grounded graph enables structural homology analysis across traditions. Ego-network feature vectors applied to 48 temporally labelled concepts across eight traditions identify cross-tradition concept pairs with high structural similarity. The method recovers known correspondences including purusha-jiva (Samkhya/Jain, sim 0.990) and prakriti-maya (Samkhya/Vedic, sim 0.972), and surfaces novel homologies. Nibbana and samsara score 0.954 despite being doctrinal opposites: both function as the ultimate reference concept in their tradition's soteriology. Cetana (Buddhist intention) and ajiva (Jain non-living matter) score 0.923, a pairing absent from the literature. These are not claims of doctrinal equivalence but of measurable structural homology: different philosophical vocabularies navigating a shared conceptual space.

The study presents a comprehensive benchmark for retrieving Sanskrit documents using English queries, focusing on the chapters of the Srimadbhagavatam. It employs a tripartite approach: Direct Retrieval (DR), Translation-based Retrieval (DT), and Query Translation (QT), utilizing shared embedding spaces and advanced translation methods to enhance retrieval systems in a RAG framework. The study fine-tunes state-of-the-art models for Sanskrit's linguistic nuances, evaluating models such as BM25, REPLUG, mDPR, ColBERT, Contriever, and GPT-2. It adapts summarization techniques for Sanskrit documents to improve QA processing. Evaluation shows DT methods outperform DR and QT in handling the cross-lingual challenges of ancient texts, improving accessibility and understanding. A dataset of 3,400 English-Sanskrit query-document pairs underpins the study, aiming to preserve Sanskrit scriptures and share their philosophical importance widely. Our dataset is publicly available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/manojbalaji1/anveshana