Explaining and Mitigating Crosslingual Tokenizer Inequities
Catherine Arnett, Tyler A. Chang, Stella Biderman, Benjamin Bergen
Abstract
The number of tokens it takes to encode parallel text in different languages is known to vary. These disparities are called token premiums. Having high token premiums leads to less throughput during training and increases costs at inference. In this paper, we show that even after controlling for dataset size, vocabulary size, and data content, monolingual tokenizers exhibit a wide range of token premiums across languages. To understand the cross-linguistic differences that cause these token premiums, we train a suite of approximately 7,000 comparable monolingual tokenizers for 97 languages, manipulating tokenization algorithm, vocabulary size, and dataset size. We measure token premiums and test for a relationship between factors such as data similarity (between tokenizer training and evaluation), vocabulary size, and pre-tokenization. We also investigate the role of language-specific features such as writing system and word length. We find that similarity between training and test data does not impact token premiums, but vocabulary size and pre-tokenization do. While simply increasing vocabulary size does not lead to reduced token premium effects, we can determine an ``optimal''vocabulary size for each language to achieve significantly reduced token premium effects. We also train superword tokenizers which allow merges over whitespaces, and we find that they both reduce token premium effects and improve compression overall. Thus, intervening on the vocabulary size or the pre-tokenizer significantly reduces crosslingual token premium effects.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Builds on12
- Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and ScalingStella Biderman, Hailey Schoelkopf, Quentin Gregory Anthony, Herbie Bradley et al.ICML 2023 · 1,822 citations
- Language Model Tokenizers Introduce Unfairness Between LanguagesAleksandar Petrov, Emanuele La Malfa, Philip H. S. Torr, Adel BibiNeurIPS 2023 · 301 citations
- Language Modeling Is CompressionGrégoire Delétang, Anian Ruoss, Paul-Ambroise Duquenne, Elliot Catt et al.ICLR 2024 · 243 citations
- Think before you speak: Training Language Models With Pause TokensSachin Goyal, Ziwei Ji, Ankit Singh Rawat, Aditya Krishna Menon et al.ICLR 2024 · 240 citations
- Getting the most out of your tokenizer for pre-training and domain adaptationGautier Dagan, Gabriel Synnaeve, Baptiste RozièreICML 2024 · 68 citations
Related papers
- Parity-Aware Byte-Pair Encoding: Improving Cross-lingual Fairness in TokenizationNegar Foroutan, Clara Meister, Debjit Paul, Joel Niklaus et al.ACL 2026 · 14 citations
- How Good is Your Tokenizer? On the Monolingual Performance of Multilingual Language ModelsPhillip Rust, Jonas Pfeiffer, Ivan Vulic, Sebastian Ruder et al.ACL 2021
- T-FREE: Subword Tokenizer-Free Generative LLMs via Sparse Representations for Memory-Efficient EmbeddingsBjörn Deiseroth, Manuel Brack, Patrick Schramowski, Kristian Kersting et al.EMNLP 2024 · 2 citations
- Exploiting Vocabulary Frequency Imbalance in Language Model Pre-trainingWoojin Chung, Jeonghoon KimNeurIPS 2025 · 6 citations
- A Partition Cover Approach to TokenizationJia Peng Lim, Shawn Tan, Davin Choo, Hady W. LauwNeurIPS 2025 · 6 citations
