Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2609.12960

Fewer Words, Not Fewer Tokens: Measuring the Sanskrit Tokenization Penalty per Proposition

Devansh Sharma
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Sanskrit fuses case, number, person and tense into word endings and chains clauses into compounds, so it is information-dense per word. Whether that density survives subword tokenization is a separate question, to be asked per unit of meaning rather than per word. On identical FLORES-200 devtest content, Sanskrit costs 1.774-2.187 times the English tokens under deployed tokenizers with vocabularies of 200,019 ids or more, but only 1.325-1.353 times the Hindi tokens. Against a deployed English tokenizer, Sanskrit-trained BPE arms then look cheaper per proposition than English on contemporary prose (0.887). Against a matched English control, the same algorithm and vocabulary trained on the English side of the same corpus, that flip disappears: at 32,000 and 64,000 pieces all 8 matched pairs, each size-matched arm against both a pair-matched and a byte-matched control, sit above 1.0 on prose with 95% intervals excluding it. The gap closes as the vocabulary grows: at 128,000 pieces the BPE pair reads 0.983 in domain while staying above parity out of domain (1.025) and on FLORES (1.116). The ratio factorises into a character-length ratio and a tokens-per-character ratio, the second near 1 throughout: what survives matched tokenization is character-level length, which Sanskrit prose lacks over English in SLP1 (1.028) and Sanskrit verse has (0.596). The robust statement is about deployed practice: on contemporary prose and on FLORES, with the Sanskrit side in SLP1 against the deployed o200k English pivot, Sanskrit costs 1.831-2.899 English tokens per proposition under the tokenizers people actually ship. Code, the results snapshot and every table here are public.

Explore related subjects

cs.CL

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Devansh Sharma. 2026-09-11. Fewer Words, Not Fewer Tokens: Measuring the Sanskrit Tokenization Penalty per Proposition. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.12960

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

DA-Cramming: Enhancing Cost-Effective Language Model Pretraining with Dependency Agreement Integration

Pretraining language models is still a challenge for many researchers due to its substantial computational costs. As such, there is growing interest in developing more affordable pretraining methods. One notable advancement in this area is the Cramming technique (Geiping and Goldstein, 2022), which enables the pretraining of BERT-style language models using just one GPU in a single day. Building on this innovative approach, we introduce the Dependency Agreement Cramming (DA-Cramming), an efficient framework that integrates information about dependency agreements into the pretraining process. Unlike existing methods that leverage similar semantic information during finetuning, our approach represents a pioneering effort focusing on enhancing the foundational language understanding with semantic information during pretraining. We meticulously design a dual-stage pretraining work flow with four dedicated submodels to capture representative dependency agreements at the chunk level, effectively transforming these agreements into embeddings to benefit the pretraining. Extensive empirical results demonstrate that our method significantly outperforms previous methods across various tasks.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

BigO(Bench): Can LLMs Generate Code with Controlled Time and Space Complexity?

We introduce BigO(Bench), a novel coding benchmark designed to evaluate the capabilities of generative language models in understanding and generating code with specified time and space complexities. This benchmark addresses the gap in current evaluations that often overlook the ability of models to comprehend and produce code constrained by computational complexity. BigO(Bench) includes tooling to infer the algorithmic complexity of any Python function from profiling measurements, including human- or LLM-generated solutions. BigO(Bench) also includes of set of 3,105 coding problems and 1,190,250 solutions from Code Contests annotated with inferred (synthetic) time and space complexity labels from the complexity framework, as well as corresponding runtime and memory footprint values for a large set of input sizes. We present results from evaluating multiple state-of-the-art language models on this benchmark, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses in handling complexity requirements. In particular, token-space reasoning models are unrivaled in code generation but not in complexity understanding, hinting that they may not generalize well to tasks for which no reward was given at training time.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

UR$^2$: Unify RAG and Reasoning through Reinforcement Learning

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown strong capabilities through two complementary paradigms: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) for knowledge grounding and Reinforcement Learning from Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) for complex reasoning. However, existing attempts to unify these paradigms remain narrow in scope, typically limited to open-domain QA with fixed retrieval settings, which constrains generalization to broader domains. To address this limitation, we propose UR$^2$ (Unified RAG and Reasoning)), a general reinforcement learning framework that dynamically coordinates retrieval and reasoning. UR$^2$ introduces two key designs: a difficulty-aware curriculum that selectively invokes retrieval only for challenging instances, and a hybrid knowledge access strategy that combines domain-specific offline corpora with on-the-fly LLM-generated summaries. Together, these components mitigate the imbalance between retrieval and reasoning and improve robustness to noisy information. Experiments on open-domain QA, MMLU-Pro, medical, and mathematical reasoning tasks show that UR$^2$, built on Qwen-2.5-3/7B and LLaMA-3.1-8B, consistently outperforms existing RAG and RL baselines, and achieves performance comparable to GPT-4o-mini and GPT-4.1-mini on several benchmarks. Code, models, and data are available at https://github.com/Tsinghua-dhy/UR2.

cs.CL↗