Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

How Good is Your Tokenizer? On the Monolingual Performance of Multilingual Language Models

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2012.15613 v2 pith:4MO44H43 submitted 2020-12-31 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords monolingualmultilingualperformancelanguagemodelstokenizerdownstreamcounterparts
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

In this work, we provide a systematic and comprehensive empirical comparison of pretrained multilingual language models versus their monolingual counterparts with regard to their monolingual task performance. We study a set of nine typologically diverse languages with readily available pretrained monolingual models on a set of five diverse monolingual downstream tasks. We first aim to establish, via fair and controlled comparisons, if a gap between the multilingual and the corresponding monolingual representation of that language exists, and subsequently investigate the reason for any performance difference. To disentangle conflating factors, we train new monolingual models on the same data, with monolingually and multilingually trained tokenizers. We find that while the pretraining data size is an important factor, a designated monolingual tokenizer plays an equally important role in the downstream performance. Our results show that languages that are adequately represented in the multilingual model's vocabulary exhibit negligible performance decreases over their monolingual counterparts. We further find that replacing the original multilingual tokenizer with the specialized monolingual tokenizer improves the downstream performance of the multilingual model for almost every task and language.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Cross-Tokenizer On-Policy Distillation via Byte-Prefix Marginalization

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Byte-Prefix Marginalization maps a teacher's next-token distribution onto the student's vocabulary through shared byte prefixes plus an explicit residual, giving a mass-preserving target for on-policy distillation acr...

  2. FineWeb2: One Pipeline to Scale Them All -- Adapting Pre-Training Data Processing to Every Language

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An adaptive, per-language data filtering and deduplication pipeline produces multilingual LLM pre-training corpora that beat prior public datasets on 11 of 14 evaluated languages, and a 20TB, 1,868 language-script dat...

  3. Krul: Efficient State Restoration for Multi-turn Conversations with Dynamic Cross-layer KV Sharing

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Krul dynamically selects per-conversation cross-layer KV cache compression from attention similarity patterns, cutting TTFT by 1.28x to 2.68x and KV storage by 1.33x to 2.35x with less than 1% average accuracy loss on...

  4. Is There a Case for Conversation Optimized Tokenizers in Large Language Models?

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Retraining LLM tokenizers on chatbot conversation data reduces token counts by 5-10% on conversational text with minimal impact on general text.

Pith tools