Improbable Bigrams Expose Vulnerabilities of Incomplete Tokens in Byte-Level Tokenizers
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Tokenization is a crucial step that bridges human-readable text with model-readable discrete tokens. However, recent studies have revealed that tokenizers can be exploited to elicit unwanted model behaviors. In this work, we investigate incomplete tokens, i.e., undecodable tokens with stray bytes resulting from byte-level byte-pair encoding (BPE) tokenization. We hypothesize that such tokens are heavily reliant on their adjacent tokens and are fragile when paired with unfamiliar tokens. To demonstrate this vulnerability, we introduce improbable bigrams: out-of-distribution combinations of incomplete tokens designed to exploit their dependency. Our experiments show that improbable bigrams are significantly prone to hallucinatory behaviors. Surprisingly, the same phrases have drastically lower rates of hallucination (90% reduction in Llama3.1) when an alternative tokenization is used. We caution against the potential vulnerabilities introduced by byte-level BPE tokenizers, which may introduce blind spots to language models.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 19 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 Oct 2024.
Builds on
8 of 19 references.
References · 8
- 2015Neural Machine Translation of Rare Words with Subword Unitscited by 2,918
- 2020Byte Pair Encoding is Suboptimal for Language Model Pretrainingcited by 192
- 2019Neural Machine Translation with Byte-Level Subwordscited by 115
- 2024Tokenization counts: the impact of tokenization on arithmetic in frontier LLMscited by 115
- 2024Coercing LLMs to do and reveal (almost) anythingcited by 89
- 2024Unpacking Tokenization: Evaluating Text Compression and its Correlation with Model Performancecited by 61
- 2024MYTE: Morphology-Driven Byte Encoding for Better and Fairer Multilingual Language Modelingcited by 40
- 2023Tokenization Matters: Navigating Data-Scarce Tokenization for Gender Inclusive Language Technologiescited by 16
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 6.
7 papers.
- 2026The Roots of Performance Disparity in Multilingual Language Models: Intrinsic Modeling Difficulty or Design Choices?cited by 11
- 2026Stop Taking Tokenizers for Granted: They Are Core Design Decisions in Large Language Modelscited by 6
- 2025UTF-8 Plumbing: Byte-level Tokenizers Unavoidably Enable LLMs to Generate Ill-formed UTF-8cited by 3
- 2026Tokenization with Split Treescited by 2
- 2026Faster Superword Tokenizationcited by 1
- 2026Breaking Safety at the Token Boundary: How BPE Tokenization Creates Exploitable Gaps in LLM Alignmentcited by 0
- 2026SPLIT: Cross-Lingual Empathy and Cultural Grounding in English and Ukrainian LLM Responsescited by 0
- 2026SPLIT: Cross-Lingual Empathy and Cultural Grounding in English and Ukrainian LLM Responses2 Jul 2026
- 2026Tokenization with Split Trees21 May 2026
- 2026Breaking Safety at the Token Boundary: How BPE Tokenization Creates Exploitable Gaps in LLM Alignment1 May 2026
- 2026Faster Superword Tokenization6 Apr 2026
- 2026Stop Taking Tokenizers for Granted: They Are Core Design Decisions in Large Language Models19 Jan 2026
- 2026The Roots of Performance Disparity in Multilingual Language Models: Intrinsic Modeling Difficulty or Design Choices?12 Jan 2026
- 2025UTF-8 Plumbing: Byte-level Tokenizers Unavoidably Enable LLMs to Generate Ill-formed UTF-85 Nov 2025