Analyzing Cognitive Plausibility of Subword Tokenization

AbstractSubword tokenization has become the de-facto standard for tokenization although comparative evaluations of their quality across languages are scarce. Existing evaluation studies focus on the effect of a tokenization algorithm on the performance in downstream tasks, or on engineering criteria such as the compression rate. We present a new evaluation paradigm that focuses on the cognitive plausibility of subword tokenization. We analyze the correlation of the tokenizer output with the reading time and accuracy of human responses on a lexical decision task. We compare three tokenization algorithms across several languages and vocabulary sizes. Our results indicate that the Unigram algorithm yields less cognitively plausible tokenization behavior and a worse coverage of derivational morphemes, in contrast with prior work.