arXiv AI

The Invisible Language Tax: Token Premiums of French and Regional Languages in 2026 LLM Tokenizers, and a French-Optimized Prototype

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Aug 10

Measuring the Tokenization Premium: A Cost Audit for Underserved Language Communities

Large language models are increasingly deployed as general-purpose educational and technical assistance systems, but their underlying infrastructure does not treat languages equally. One underexamined source of disparity is tokenization: semantically equivalent content can require substantially different token counts across languages, affecting API cost, latency, and usable context length before a model is invoked.

arXiv AI
Aug 28

Lost in Compression: A Controlled Cross-Lingual Audit of Extractive Prompt Compressors

The study evaluates how extractive prompt compressors affect token costs across ten languages, finding that compressors trained on English data widen the token premium gap for non‑English languages, while a multilingual compressor does not. The gap is tied to the supervision data rather than model architecture, and aggressive compression can reduce non‑English contexts to near‑zero utility. A translate‑then‑compress approach can match or outperform native compression at roughly half the token cost in several languages.

By Mantas Lukauskas
arXiv AI
Sep 15

The Language-Energy Divide: Measuring Energy Costs of Multilingual LLM Inference

The paper investigates the energy costs of multilingual large language model (LLM) inference, revealing significant disparities across languages. Using the ML.Energy framework, the authors find that energy consumption per output token can differ by up to 8.3×, and total energy for a fixed request set can vary up to 179×, with English being the cheapest and Pashto the most expensive. The study attributes these differences to higher per-token costs for complex or rare scripts and longer outputs for low‑resource languages, and notes that high‑energy languages also tend to have lower task accuracy.

By Naihao Deng, Alissa Shen, Yiming Feng, Joan Nwatu, Jae-Won Chung, Mosharaf Chowdhury, Yulong Chen, Rada Mihalcea
arXiv AI
Sep 17

Objective vs. Search: Decomposing What Makes a Good Tokeniser

The paper introduces two new tokenisation algorithms—BottomUpLL and TopDownComp—to systematically explore the 2x2 design space defined by optimisation objective (compression vs. log‑likelihood) and search procedure (bottom‑up merging vs. top‑down pruning). Experiments across model sizes, vocabularies, and domains show that the search procedure, rather than the objective, consistently yields lower bits‑per‑byte, while no clear pattern emerges on the BLiMP benchmark. These findings clarify how tokeniser design choices influence language‑model performance and provide guidance for constructing tokenisers more principledly.

By Ahmetcan Yavuz, Clara Meister, Tiago Pimentel
arXiv AI
Aug 11

Length-MAX Tokenizer for Language Models

arXiv:2511. 20849v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We introduce a new tokenizer for language models that minimizes the average tokens per character, thereby reducing the number of tokens needed to represent text during training and to generate text during inference.

By Dong Dong, Weijie Su
arXiv AI
Jul 17

In-Place Tokenizer Expansion for Pre-trained LLMs

arXiv:2607. 15232v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A tokenizer fixed at the start of pre-training allocates vocabulary in proportion to the pre-training corpus, reflecting the deployment priorities at that time.

By Jimmy T. H. Smith, Tarek Dakhran, Alberto Cabrera, Simon S. Lee, Paul Pak, Aditya Tadimeti, Tim Seyde, Maxime Labonne, Alexander Amini, Mathias Lechner