Tokens, the oft-overlooked appetizer: Large language models, the distributional hypothesis, and meaning

Tokenization is a necessary component within the current architecture of many language models, including the transformer-based large language models (LLMs) of Generative AI, yet its impact on the model's cognition is often overlooked. We argue that LLMs demonstrate that the Distributional Hypothesis (DM) is sufficient for reasonably human-like language performance, and that the emergence of human-meaningful linguistic units among tokens motivates linguistically-informed interventions in existing, linguistically-agnostic tokenization techniques, particularly with respect to their roles as (1) semantic primitives and as (2) vehicles for conveying salient distributional patterns from human language to the model. We explore tokenizations from a BPE tokenizer; extant model vocabularies obtained from Hugging Face and tiktoken; and the information in exemplar token vectors as they move through the layers of a RoBERTa (large) model. Besides creating sub-optimal semantic building blocks and obscuring the model's access to the necessary distributional patterns, we describe how tokenization pretraining can be a backdoor for bias and other unwanted content, which current alignment practices may not remediate. Additionally, we relay evidence that the tokenization algorithm's objective function impacts the LLM's cognition, despite being meaningfully insulated from the main system intelligence.

The Resume Paradox: Greater Language Differences, Smaller Pay Gaps

Over the past decade, the gender pay gap has remained steady with women earning 84 cents for every dollar earned by men on average. Many studies explain this gap through demand-side bias in the labor market represented through employers' job postings. However, few studies analyze potential bias from the worker supply-side. Here, we analyze the language in millions of US workers' resumes to investigate how differences in workers' self-representation by gender compare to differences in earnings. Across US occupations, language differences between male and female resumes correspond to 11% of the variation in gender pay gap. This suggests that females' resumes that are semantically similar to males' resumes may have greater wage parity. However, surprisingly, occupations with greater language differences between male and female resumes have lower gender pay gaps. A doubling of the language difference between female and male resumes results in an annual wage increase of $2,797 for the average female worker. This result holds with controls for gender-biases of resume text and we find that per-word bias poorly describes the variance in wage gap. The results demonstrate that textual data and self-representation are valuable factors for improving worker representations and understanding employment inequities.