0

Counting Ability of Large Language Models and Impact of Tokenization

Research explores how tokenization affects the counting abilities of large language models, revealing that byte-level tokenization can impair their theoretical computability and suggesting the need for new tokenization techniques to improve reasoning.

Year
2024
Venue
arXiv 2024
Authors
3
Hosting
Abstract onlyARXIV-DEFAULT

Cite

Notes

Only stored in your browser.

Attribution

Abstract & full text
arxiv.org/abs/2410.19730v2ARXIV-DEFAULT
TL;DR
Semantic Scholar
Attribution policy →

Abstract

Transformers, the backbone of modern large language models (LLMs), face inherent architectural limitations that impede their reasoning capabilities. Unlike recurrent networks, Transformers lack recurrent connections, confining them to constant-depth computation. This restriction places them in the complexity class TC$^0$, making them theoretically incapable of solving tasks that demand increasingly deep reasoning as input length grows. Counting, a fundamental component of many reasoning tasks, also requires reasoning depth to grow linearly to be performed inductively. While previous studies have established the upper limits of counting ability in Transformer-based expert models (i.e., models specifically trained for counting tasks), these findings do not directly extend to general-purpose LLMs due to differences in reasoning mechanisms. Recent work has highlighted how Chain of Thought (CoT) reasoning can help alleviate some of the architectural limitations of Transformers in counting tasks. However, little attention has been paid to the role of tokenization in these models. Unlike expert models that often use character-level tokenization, LLMs typically rely on byte-level (BPE) tokenizers, which fundamentally alters the way reasoning is processed. Our work investigates the impact of tokenization on the counting abilities of LLMs, uncovering substantial performance variations based on input tokenization differences. We provide both theoretical and experimental analyses, offering insights into how tokenization choices can undermine models' theoretical computability, thereby inspiring the design of new tokenization methods to enhance reasoning in LLMs.

Authors

3