Current language models (LMs) use a fixed, static subword tokenizer. This default choice typically results in degraded efficiency and language capabilities, especially in languages other than English. To address this issue, we challenge the static design and propose retrofitting LMs with dynamic tokenization: a way to dynamically decide on token boundaries based on the input text via a subword-merging algorithm inspired by byte-pair encoding. We merge frequent subword sequences in a batch, then apply a pre-trained embedding-prediction hypernetwork to compute the token embeddings on-the-fly. For encoder-style models (e.g., XLM-R), this on average reduces token sequence lengths by >20% across 14 languages while degrading performance by less than 2%. The same method applied to pre-filling and scoring in decoder-style models (e.g., Mistral-7B; evaluated on English) results in minimal performance degradation at up to 6% reduction in sequence length. Overall, we find that dynamic tokenization can mitigate the limitations of static tokenization by substantially improving inference speed and promoting fairness across languages, enabling more equitable and adaptable LMs.

In an era increasingly dominated by digital platforms, the spread of misinformation poses a significant challenge, highlighting the need for solutions capable of assessing information veracity. Our research contributes to the field of Explainable Artificial Antelligence (XAI) by developing transformer-based fact-checking models that contextualise and justify their decisions by generating human-accessible explanations. Importantly, we also develop models for automatic evaluation of explanations for fact-checking verdicts across different dimensions such as \texttt{(self)-contradiction}, \texttt{hallucination}, \texttt{convincingness} and \texttt{overall quality}. By introducing human-centred evaluation methods and developing specialised datasets, we emphasise the need for aligning Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated explanations with human judgements. This approach not only advances theoretical knowledge in XAI but also holds practical implications by enhancing the transparency, reliability and users' trust in AI-driven fact-checking systems. Furthermore, the development of our metric learning models is a first step towards potentially increasing efficiency and reducing reliance on extensive manual assessment. Based on experimental results, our best performing generative model \textsc{ROUGE-1} score of 47.77, demonstrating superior performance in generating fact-checking explanations, particularly when provided with high-quality evidence. Additionally, the best performing metric learning model showed a moderately strong correlation with human judgements on objective dimensions such as \texttt{(self)-contradiction and \texttt{hallucination}, achieving a Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) of around 0.7.}