Understanding the Ability of LLMs to Handle Character-Level Perturbation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This work investigates the resilience of contemporary large language models (LLMs) against frequent character-level perturbations. We examine three types of character-level perturbations including introducing numerous typos within words, shuffling the characters in each word, and inserting a large number of invisible characters into the text. Surprisingly, even under severe perturbation, such as shuffling nearly all words character-wise to produce text that is almost unreadable to humans, or inserting invisible characters which are several times more than the visible ones as noise, many LLMs still maintain notable performance. We explore the underlying causes of this robustness and find that LLMs exhibit remarkable resilience to chaotic segmentation and fragmented tokenization. Furthermore, we examine the mechanisms by which LLMs remove perturbations to correctly comprehend text, including both implicit and explicit mechanisms for character-level perturbation. We hope that our findings on the low-level robustness of LLMs will unveil their inherent architectural strengths, reveal the potential risks of their misuse, and inform the reliable deployment of LLMs across diverse application scenarios.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 20 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Oct 2025.
Builds on
16 of 20 references.
References · 16
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
- 2021RoFormer: Enhanced Transformer with Rotary Position Embeddingcited by 4,703
- 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
- 2023Qwen Technical Reportcited by 3,344
- 2022Ignore Previous Prompt: Attack Techniques For Language Modelscited by 832
- 2018TextBugger: Generating Adversarial Text Against Real-world Applicationscited by 381
- 2024Jailbreak Attacks and Defenses Against Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 230
- 2023PromptRobust: Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Large Language Models on Adversarial Promptscited by 226
- 2024On Memorization of Large Language Models in Logical Reasoningcited by 117
- 2024Physics of Language Models: Part 2.1, Grade-School Math and the Hidden Reasoning Processcited by 108
- 2024LV-Eval: A Balanced Long-Context Benchmark with 5 Length Levels Up to 256Kcited by 81
- 2024Functional Benchmarks for Robust Evaluation of Reasoning Performance, and the Reasoning Gapcited by 79
4 more
- 2024A Peek into Token Bias: Large Language Models Are Not Yet Genuine Reasonerscited by 73
- 2022Evaluating the Susceptibility of Pre-Trained Language Models via Handcrafted Adversarial Examplescited by 69
- 2025Broken Tokens? Your Language Model can Secretly Handle Non-Canonical Tokenizationscited by 17
- 2024Robustness of Large Language Models Against Adversarial Attackscited by 12
Built on by
Not cited yet.