The Price of Token Boundaries: Compression Certificates and Prediction
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Pre-tokenisation restricts which text fragments can become prediction units, but its compression cost is obscured when tokenisers are compared only under the same boundaries. We measure this cost by bounding the minimum token count from both sides, with and without a regular-expression boundary rule. Nonnegative prices on token occurrences yield a lower bound through shortest paths and vocabulary-budget selection; maximising over all prices recovers the linear programming relaxation, and an independent integer checker certifies the reported values. On English Wikipedia, boundaries increase the optimal token count by 28.3--36.8%. Byte pair encoding lies 2.1% above the constrained lower bound, but 10.9% above the unrestricted bound. Compression and prediction favour different dictionaries: at 85M non-embedding parameters and matched training-token budgets, unrestricted fitting yields higher mean held-out bits per byte under a common unrestricted decoder in all 12 languages in the paired study and 11 of 12 under independent tuning and evaluation. To study intermediate boundary policies, we introduce boundary licences, which limit the vocabulary entries permitted to cross cuts and admit the same form of certificate. On separate English and Chinese fitting corpora, licensing 10% of the vocabulary budget recovers 85.2% and 100.0% of the achieved token-count reduction from removing all cuts. These results quantify the compression cost of boundaries while separating it from the prediction quality of the resulting token units.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Sep 2026.
Builds on
21 of 31 references.
References · 21
- 2015Neural Machine Translation of Rare Words with Subword Unitscited by 2,918
- 2018SentencePiece: A simple and language independent subword tokenizer and detokenizer for Neural Text Processingcited by 1,989
- 2024The FineWeb Datasets: Decanting the Web for the Finest Text Data at Scalecited by 1,160
- 2018Subword Regularization: Improving Neural Network Translation Models with Multiple Subword Candidatescited by 639
- 2019BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for Englishcited by 564
- 2020Byte Pair Encoding is Suboptimal for Language Model Pretrainingcited by 192
- 2023MEGABYTE: Predicting Million-byte Sequences with Multiscale Transformerscited by 170
- 2024Byte Latent Transformer: Patches Scale Better Than Tokenscited by 146
- 2025FineWeb2: One Pipeline to Scale Them All -- Adapting Pre-Training Data Processing to Every Languagecited by 143
- 2015Parallelizing the dual revised simplex methodcited by 89
- 2024Tokenization Is More Than Compressioncited by 89
- 2025SuperBPE: Space Travel for Language Modelscited by 63
9 more
- 2023Tokenization and the Noiseless Channelcited by 59
- 2024MambaByte: Token-free Selective State Space Modelcited by 59
- 2025Boundless Byte Pair Encoding: Breaking the Pre-tokenization Barriercited by 32
- 2025OpenCSG Chinese Corpus: A Series of High-quality Chinese Datasets for LLM Trainingcited by 21
- 2024Two Counterexamples to Tokenization and the Noiseless Channelcited by 13
- 2025Entropy-Driven Pre-Tokenization for Byte-Pair Encodingcited by 6
- 2026Tokenisation via Convex Relaxationscited by 4
- 2026Faster Superword Tokenizationcited by 1
- 2026Joint Optimization for Greedy Longest-match Tokenizationcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.