mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Tokenizer Fertility and Zero-Shot Performance of Foundation Models on Ukrainian Legal Text: A Comparative Study

arXiv 2605.14890 ↗First posted 14 May 2026cs.CL cs.AIcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Tokenizer fertility varies 1.6x across foundation models on Ukrainian legal text, yet this cost-critical dimension is absent from model selection practice. We benchmark seven models from five providers on 273 validated court decisions from Ukraine's state registry (EDRSR), measuring tokenizer fertility and zero-shot performance on three tasks. Four findings emerge. (1) Qwen 3 models consume 60% more tokens than Llama-family models on identical input, making tokenizer analysis a prerequisite for cost-efficient deployment. (2) NVIDIA Nemotron Super 3 (120B) achieves the highest composite score (83.1), outperforming Mistral Large 3 (5.6x more total parameters) at one-third the API cost model scale is a poor proxy for domain performance. (3) Few-shot prompting degrades performance by up to 26 percentage points; stratified and prompt-sensitivity ablations confirm this is intrinsic to Ukrainian-language demonstrations, not an artifact of example selection. (4) A cross-temporal generalization experiment reveals that classifiers trained on pre-war court ecisions (2008-2013) lose 27.9 percentage points when applied to full-scale invasion era decisions (2022-2026), with a pronounced forward-backward asymmetry: newer models transfer backward (+14.6 pp above forward transfer), but older models fail catastrophically on wartime legal language. For practitioners: tokenizer analysis should precede model selection, and zero-shot is a more reliable default than few-shot for morphologically rich languages. To support reproducibility and address the absence of Ukrainian from legal NLP benchmarks, we release a public dataset of 14,452 court decisions spanning 2008-2026, annotated with seven outcome labels across three temporal epochs that capture the impact of armed conflict on judicial proceedings.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 May 2026.

Builds on

17 of 33 references.

References · 17

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
  3. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  4. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
  5. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
  6. 2019Unsupervised Cross-lingual Representation Learning at Scalecited by 3,907
  7. 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,747
  8. 2015Neural Machine Translation of Rare Words with Subword Unitscited by 2,898
  9. 2018SentencePiece: A simple and language independent subword tokenizer and detokenizer for Neural Text Processingcited by 1,973
  10. 2022Rethinking the Role of Demonstrations: What Makes In-Context Learning Work?cited by 1,413
  11. 2021Fantastically Ordered Prompts and Where to Find Them: Overcoming Few-Shot Prompt Order Sensitivitycited by 1,122
  12. 2020How Good is Your Tokenizer? On the Monolingual Performance of Multilingual Language Modelscited by 313
5 more
  1. 2023Language Model Tokenizers Introduce Unfairness Between Languagescited by 207
  2. 2023ChatGPT Beyond English: Towards a Comprehensive Evaluation of Large Language Models in Multilingual Learningcited by 203
  3. 2023Do All Languages Cost the Same? Tokenization in the Era of Commercial Language Modelscited by 186
  4. 2023LEXTREME: A Multi-Lingual and Multi-Task Benchmark for the Legal Domaincited by 68
  5. 2021UA-GEC: Grammatical Error Correction and Fluency Corpus for the Ukrainian Languagecited by 19

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.

4 papers.