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 Computation and Language
Oct 9

Latent Core Tokenizer: Compress, but Meaningfully

The paper introduces the Latent Core Tokenizer (LCT), a language‑agnostic method that first discovers reusable linguistic units using Minimum Description Length, entropy‑based boundary signals, and morphotactic constraints before building a shared vocabulary. With a 200K‑token vocabulary across 104 languages, LCT shows lower fertility and higher MorphScore than BPE, Unigram, and parity‑aware BPE, while keeping tokenization cost comparable across languages. On four multilingual downstream benchmarks, LCT outperforms the baselines by 1.48, 1.83, and 2.00 aggregate points, demonstrating that compression alone does not guarantee representation quality and underscoring the role of morphology‑driven structural discovery.

By Felermino D. M. A. Ali, Millicent Ochieng, Ogbemi Ekwejunor-Etchie, Ade Famoti, Jacki O'Neill, Debjit Paul
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