LLMs process text as sequences of tokens that roughly correspond to words, where less common words are represented by multiple tokens. However, individual tokens are often semantically unrelated to the meanings of the words/concepts they comprise. For example, Llama-2-7b’s tokenizer splits the word “patrolling” into two tokens, “pat” and “rolling”, neither of which correspond to semantically meaningful units like “patrol” or "-ing.” Similarly, the overall meanings of named entities like “Neil Young” and multi-word expressions like “break a leg” cannot be directly inferred from their constituent tokens. Mechanistically, how do LLMs convert such arbitrary groups of tokens into useful higher-level representations? In this work, we find that last token representations of named entities and multi-token words exhibit a pronounced “erasure” effect, where information about previous and current tokens is rapidly forgotten in early layers. Using this observation, we propose a method to “read out” the implicit vocabulary of an autoregressive LLM by examining differences in token representations across layers, and present results of this method for Llama-2-7b and Llama-3-8B. To our knowledge, this is the first attempt to probe the implicit vocabulary of an LLM.

Text summarization models are approaching human levels of fidelity. Existing benchmarking corpora provide concordant pairs of full and abridged versions of Web, news or professional content. To date, all summarization datasets operate under a one-size-fits-all paradigm that may not reflect the full range of organic summarization needs. Several recently proposed models (e.g., plug and play language models) have the capacity to condition the generated summaries on a desired range of themes. These capacities remain largely unused and unevaluated as there is no dedicated dataset that would support the task of topic-focused summarization. This paper introduces the first topical summarization corpus NEWTS, based on the well-known CNN/Dailymail dataset, and annotated via online crowd-sourcing. Each source article is paired with two reference summaries, each focusing on a different theme of the source document. We evaluate a representative range of existing techniques and analyze the effectiveness of different prompting methods.