mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The Impact of Token Granularity on the Predictive Power of Language Model Surprisal

arXiv 2412.11940 ↗First posted 16 Dec 2024cs.CLcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Word-by-word language model surprisal is often used to model the incremental processing of human readers, which raises questions about how various choices in language modeling influence its predictive power. One factor that has been overlooked in cognitive modeling is the granularity of subword tokens, which explicitly encodes information about word length and frequency, and ultimately influences the quality of vector representations that are learned. This paper presents experiments that manipulate the token granularity and evaluate its impact on the ability of surprisal to account for processing difficulty of naturalistic text and garden-path constructions. Experiments with naturalistic reading times reveal a substantial influence of token granularity on surprisal, with tokens defined by a vocabulary size of 8,000 resulting in surprisal that is most predictive. In contrast, on garden-path constructions, language models trained on coarser-grained tokens generally assigned higher surprisal to critical regions, suggesting a greater sensitivity to garden-path effects than previously reported. Taken together, these results suggest a large role of token granularity on the quality of language model surprisal for cognitive modeling.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Dec 2024.

Builds on

20 of 52 references.

References · 20

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2013Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionalitycited by 3,462
  3. 2015Neural Machine Translation of Rare Words with Subword Unitscited by 2,898
  4. 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,734
  5. 2024Transformers are SSMs: Generalized Models and Efficient Algorithms Through Structured State Space Dualitycited by 1,283
  6. 2018Subword Regularization: Improving Neural Network Translation Models with Multiple Subword Candidatescited by 632
  7. 2020Byte Pair Encoding is Suboptimal for Language Model Pretrainingcited by 189
  8. 2020On the Predictive Power of Neural Language Models for Human Real-Time Comprehension Behaviorcited by 115
  9. 2022Why Does Surprisal From Larger Transformer-Based Language Models Provide a Poorer Fit to Human Reading Times?cited by 111
  10. 2023Testing the Predictions of Surprisal Theory in 11 Languagescited by 75
  11. 2024Why do language models perform worse for morphologically complex languages?cited by 62
  12. 2023Tokenization and the Noiseless Channelcited by 58
8 more
  1. 2020Human Sentence Processing: Recurrence or Attention?cited by 51
  2. 2017The Natural Stories Corpuscited by 40
  3. 2023Transformer-Based Language Model Surprisal Predicts Human Reading Times Best with About Two Billion Training Tokenscited by 39
  4. 2024How to Compute the Probability of a Wordcited by 36
  5. 2024Leading Whitespaces of Language Models' Subword Vocabulary Pose a Confound for Calculating Word Probabilitiescited by 30
  6. 2024From Language Models over Tokens to Language Models over Characterscited by 28
  7. 2023Words, Subwords, and Morphemes: What Really Matters in the Surprisal-Reading Time Relationship?cited by 13
  8. 2024On the Proper Treatment of Tokenization in Psycholinguisticscited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 4.

5 papers.