arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language · · 4 min read

How Surprising Is Historical Italian to Language Models? Tokenization Tax, Comprehension Tax, and a Simple Mitigation

Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.

Computer Science > Computation and Language

arXiv:2606.27275 (cs)
[Submitted on 25 Jun 2026]

Title:How Surprising Is Historical Italian to Language Models? Tokenization Tax, Comprehension Tax, and a Simple Mitigation

View a PDF of the paper titled How Surprising Is Historical Italian to Language Models? Tokenization Tax, Comprehension Tax, and a Simple Mitigation, by Maria Levchenko
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly critical to digital library workflows, yet their ability to process historical language remains poorly understood. Historical difficulty is typically treated as a monolithic barrier, conflating orthographic variation, linguistic distance, and pretraining exposure. In this paper, we propose a diagnostic framework that decomposes this difficulty into four distinct dimensions: tokenization cost, predictive uncertainty (surprisal), semantic robustness, and context sensitivity.
We evaluate this framework on three datasets spanning three centuries: (1) a newly curated corpus of 17th-century Italian texts (1610-1689) digitized from original page images; (2) canonical 19th-century Italian "I Promessi Sposi" serving as a high-exposure control; and (3) 18th-century Russian civil print books as a contrastive orthographic stress test.
Our results reveal a distinct dissociation between encoding cost and comprehension. While Russian and early modern Italian incur comparable tokenization penalties (25-30% inflation), their predictive difficulty diverges sharply. 17th-century Italian is on average 2.4 times more surprising than its modern equivalent - with academic prose reaching 3.2 times - whereas Russian shows only a modest increase. But predictive uncertainty does not imply representational degradation: embedding similarity remains robust (> 0.85) across all datasets, confirming that models can represent historical meaning even when generation is unstable.
Finally, we demonstrate that a minimal temporal context prompt reduces historical surprisal by approximately 60%, offering a simple, model-agnostic mitigation. These findings suggest that while historical text imposes a consistent encoding tax, digital libraries can safely deploy LLMs for semantic retrieval tasks, provided that generative applications are carefully adapted.
Comments: The 22nd Conference on Information and Research Science Connecting to Digital and Library Science
Subjects: Computation and Language (cs.CL); Digital Libraries (cs.DL)
MSC classes: 68T50, 68P20
ACM classes: I.2.7; H.3.3; H.3.7; I.7.5
Cite as: arXiv:2606.27275 [cs.CL]
  (or arXiv:2606.27275v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.27275
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Maria Levchenko [view email]
[v1] Thu, 25 Jun 2026 16:52:21 UTC (512 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled How Surprising Is Historical Italian to Language Models? Tokenization Tax, Comprehension Tax, and a Simple Mitigation, by Maria Levchenko
  • View PDF
  • HTML (experimental)
  • TeX Source

Current browse context:

cs.CL
< prev   |   next >
Change to browse by:

References & Citations

Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

loading...
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy Reddit
Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.

Sign in →

No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.

More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language