mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Effects of sub-word segmentation on performance of transformer language models

arXiv 2305.05480 ↗First posted 9 May 2023cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 12

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Language modeling is a fundamental task in natural language processing, which has been thoroughly explored with various architectures and hyperparameters. However, few studies focus on the effect of sub-word segmentation on the performance of language models (LMs). In this paper, we compare GPT and BERT models trained with the statistical segmentation algorithm BPE vs. two unsupervised algorithms for morphological segmentation -- Morfessor and StateMorph. We train the models for several languages -- including ones with very rich morphology -- and compare their performance with different segmentation algorithms, vocabulary sizes, and model sizes. The results show that training with morphological segmentation allows the LMs to: 1. achieve lower perplexity, 2. converge more efficiently in terms of training time, and 3. achieve equivalent or better evaluation scores on downstream tasks. Lastly, we show 4. that LMs of smaller size using morphological segmentation can perform comparably to models of larger size trained with BPE -- both in terms of (1) perplexity and (3) scores on downstream tasks. Points (2) and (4) impact on sustainability of LMs, since they reduce the model cost: size and computation time. While (2) reduces cost only in the training phase, (4) does so also in the inference phase.

Key facts. Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 May 2023.

Builds on

23 of 38 references.

References · 23

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2014Neural Machine Translation by Jointly Learning to Align and Translatecited by 4,530
  3. 2014Learning Phrase Representations using RNN Encoder-Decoder for Statistical Machine Translationcited by 4,016
  4. 2014Sequence to Sequence Learning with Neural Networkscited by 2,974
  5. 2015Neural Machine Translation of Rare Words with Subword Unitscited by 2,898
  6. 2019Transformer-XL: Attentive Language Models Beyond a Fixed-Length Contextcited by 1,830
  7. 2016Google's Neural Machine Translation System: Bridging the Gap between Human and Machine Translationcited by 1,471
  8. 2015Effective Approaches to Attention-based Neural Machine Translationcited by 1,024
  9. 2018Subword Regularization: Improving Neural Network Translation Models with Multiple Subword Candidatescited by 632
  10. 2020Universal Dependencies v2: An Evergrowing Multilingual Treebank Collectioncited by 269
  11. 2020Byte Pair Encoding is Suboptimal for Language Model Pretrainingcited by 189
  12. 2022Towards a Cleaner Document-Oriented Multilingual Crawled Corpuscited by 143
11 more
  1. 2019Well-Read Students Learn Better: On the Importance of Pre-training Compact Modelscited by 118
  2. 2019Multilingual is not enough: BERT for Finnishcited by 118
  3. 2014On Using Very Large Target Vocabulary for Neural Machine Translationcited by 80
  4. 2021Superbizarre Is Not Superb: Derivational Morphology Improves BERT's Interpretation of Complex Wordscited by 63
  5. 2022Impact of Tokenization on Language Models: An Analysis for Turkishcited by 62
  6. 2020Morphology Matters: A Multilingual Language Modeling Analysiscited by 37
  7. 2021Why don't people use character-level machine translation?cited by 27
  8. 2022RuCoLA: Russian Corpus of Linguistic Acceptabilitycited by 26
  9. 2022The SIGMORPHON 2022 Shared Task on Morpheme Segmentationcited by 25
  10. 2020Morfessor EM+Prune: Improved Subword Segmentation with Expectation Maximization and Pruningcited by 11
  11. 2021Finnish Paraphrase Corpuscited by 10

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 6; 2026: 3.

12 papers.