Byte Latent Transformer:  Patches Scale Better Than Tokens

Paper · Source
Novel LLM Architectures

We introduce the Byte Latent Transformer (BLT), a new byte-level LLM architecture that, for the first time, matches tokenization-based LLM performance at scale with significant improvements in inference efficiency and robustness. BLT encodes bytes into dynamically sized patches, which serve as the primary units of computation. Patches are segmented based on the entropy of the next byte, allocating more compute and model capacity where increased data complexity demands it. We present the first flop controlled scaling study of byte-level models up to 8B parameters and 4T training bytes. Our results demonstrate the feasibility of scaling models trained on raw bytes without a fixed vocabulary.

To efficiently allocate compute, we propose a dynamic, learnable method for grouping bytes into patches (§2) and a new model architecture that mixes byte and patch information. Unlike tokenization, BLT has no fixed vocabulary for patches. Arbitrary groups of bytes are mapped to latent patch representations via light-weight learned encoder and decoder modules. We show that this results in more efficient allocation of compute than tokenization-based models. Tokenization-based llms allocate the same amount of compute to every token. This trades efficiency for performance, since tokens are induced with compression heuristics that are not always correlated with the complexity of predictions. Central to our architecture is the idea that models should dynamically allocate compute where it is needed. For example, a large transformer is not needed to predict the ending of most words, since these are comparably easy, low-entropy decisions compared to choosing the first word of a new sentence. This is reflected in BLT’s architecture (§3) where there are three transformer blocks: two small byte-level local models and a large global latent transformer (Figure 2). To determine how to group bytes into patches and therefore how to dynamically allocate compute, BLT segments data based on the entropy of the next-byte prediction creating contextualized groupings of bytes with relatively uniform information density.

A diagram of a computer

A screen shot of a computer

We use “tokens” to refer to byte-groups drawn from a finite vocabulary determined prior to

training as opposed to “patches” which refer to dynamically grouped sequences without a fixed vocabulary.

A critical difference between patches and tokens is that with tokens, the model has no direct access to the underlying byte features.

Lines of inquiry this paper opens 24

Research framings built by reading the notes related to this paper — the questions it feeds into.

Do language models truly understand their encoded knowledge or merely retrieve patterns? How should test-time compute be allocated adaptively across task difficulties? When do additional thinking tokens stop improving reasoning performance? How can parameter sparsity improve interpretability while maintaining model capability? Does learning articulatory physics explain speech communication superiority? Does prompting inject new knowledge into models or activate existing knowledge? Should GUI agents use structured UI perception instead of raw pixels? How should context management strategies balance efficiency with agent reliability? How does tokenizing intelligence reshape labor markets and institutional outcomes? How do diffusion language models compare to autoregressive architectures? What determines whether visible reasoning traces improve task performance? Is model misalignment inherent to base models or induced by alignment procedures? How does model scale affect fine-tuning and downstream task performance? What are the trade-offs between memory capacity and continuous task learning? Can scaling alone produce compositional generalization in neural networks? How do transformer circuits and attention mechanisms enable or limit reasoning?