Can Perplexity Predict Fine-Tuning Performance? An Investigation of Tokenization Effects on Sequential Language Models for Nepali

Overview

• Recent language models use subword mechanisms to handle words not seen during training
• Perplexity, an intrinsic metric, is commonly used to measure the generation capacity of these models
• Increasing subword granularity typically reduces perplexity, but the impact on model understanding is less studied
• This paper explores how different tokenization schemes affect the performance of language models on downstream tasks in Nepali

Plain English Explanation

Language models, the AI systems that can generate human-like text, often encounter words they haven't seen before during testing. To handle these out-of-vocabulary (OOV) words, they use subword mechanisms that break words down into smaller pieces. The ability of these models to generate text is usually measured by an intrinsic metric called perplexity, which gets lower as the model performs better.

Previous research has shown that increasing the granularity, or level of detail, of these subwords can reduce perplexity. However, there hasn't been much study on how subword choices affect the model's actual understanding of language, particularly for languages other than the major ones like English.

To explore this, the researchers in this paper used six different tokenization (subword splitting) schemes to train relatively small language models in the Nepali language. They then tested how well these models performed on various real-world language tasks, like summarizing text or answering questions.

The results showed that while a popular tokenization method used in models like GPT and RoBERTa (called byte-level BPE) can improve perplexity, it doesn't necessarily lead to the best performance on downstream tasks in Nepali. In fact, other algorithms like SentencePiece tended to work better. The researchers also focused on a different type of language model, called a sequential transformer, compared to the more common BERT-based models used in recent studies.

Technical Explanation

This paper investigates the impact of different subword tokenization schemes on the performance of language models, particularly on downstream tasks in the low-resource Nepali language.

The researchers trained relatively small sequential transformer-based language models using six diverse tokenization approaches: WordPiece, SentencePiece, Unigram, BPE, Byte-level BPE, and character-level. They then fine-tuned these pretrained models on a variety of Nepali NLP tasks, including text classification, question answering, and summarization.

While previous work has shown that increasing subword granularity can reduce perplexity, an intrinsic metric of language model performance, the authors found that this does not necessarily translate to better downstream task results. In fact, they demonstrate that the popular byte-level BPE algorithm used in models like GPT and RoBERTa is, on average, sub-optimal compared to alternatives like SentencePiece for fine-tuning on Nepali tasks.

This divergence between perplexity and task-specific performance highlights the importance of evaluating language models beyond just intrinsic measures. The authors' focus on a sequential transformer architecture, rather than the more commonly studied BERT-based models, also provides a complementary perspective on subword tokenization effects.

Critical Analysis

The researchers acknowledge several limitations in their work. First, they only explored a relatively small set of language models, trained on a limited amount of Nepali data. Expanding the scale and diversity of the models and datasets could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the tokenization effects.

Additionally, the paper does not delve into the underlying reasons why certain tokenization schemes outperform others for downstream tasks in Nepali. Further analysis of factors like the morphological complexity of the language, data distribution, and the specific task requirements could yield valuable insights.

While the authors demonstrate the suboptimal performance of byte-level BPE for Nepali, they do not investigate whether this finding generalizes to other low-resource languages. Systematic studies across a broader range of languages would be necessary to draw more definitive conclusions.

Finally, the paper does not address potential biases or limitations introduced by the choice of tokenization, which can be particularly relevant for applications involving sensitive domains like healthcare or social services.

Conclusion

This paper provides a valuable contribution to the understanding of how subword tokenization affects the performance of language models, particularly in the context of low-resource languages like Nepali. The finding that perplexity-optimal tokenization schemes do not necessarily lead to the best downstream task results highlights the importance of evaluating language models beyond just intrinsic metrics.

The authors' focus on sequential transformer architectures also offers a complementary perspective to the prevailing BERT-based models. While the study has some limitations, it underscores the need for more comprehensive research on the interplay between tokenization, model architecture, and task-specific performance, especially for underrepresented languages.

As language models become increasingly ubiquitous, understanding these nuanced factors will be crucial in developing robust and equitable AI systems that can truly benefit a diverse range of users and applications.