First, the embedding typically uses thousands of dimensions.
Then, the value along each dimension is represented with a floating point number which will take 16 bits (can be smaller though with higher quantization).
First, the embedding typically uses thousands of dimensions.
Then, the value along each dimension is represented with a floating point number which will take 16 bits (can be smaller though with higher quantization).
My point was that you compared how the LLM represents a token internally versus how “English” transmits a word. That’s a category error.
To be pedantic, we can't feed humans ASCII directly, we have to convert it to images or sounds first.
> My original question was about that: why can't we just feed the LLMs ascii, and let it figure out how it wants to encode that internally, __implicitly__? I.e., we just design a network and feed it ascii, as opposed to figuring out an encoding in a separate step and feeding it tokens in that encoding.
That could be done, by having only 256 tokens, one for each possible byte, plus perhaps a few special-use tokens like "end of sequence". But it would be much less efficient.