arXiv:2605. 31220v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Confidence estimation (CE), i.
arXiv:2607. 07626v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reliable confidence estimation is essential for deploying large language models (LLMs) in confidence-aware systems, where downstream decisions such as retrieval, tool use, and adaptive computation depend on accurately estimating answer reliability.
The paper investigates multilingual confidence calibration in large language models, revealing that non‑English languages are systematically less well calibrated than English. By analyzing internal representations, the authors find that late‑intermediate layers provide a more reliable confidence signal than the final layer, which is biased by English‑centric training. They propose training‑free methods such as Language‑Aware Confidence Ensemble (LACE) to adaptively select optimal layers per language, aiming to improve global equity and trustworthiness of LLMs.
arXiv:2607. 19243v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Although Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable multilingual fluency, their internal knowledge representations remain disproportionately biased toward high-resource languages.
The paper presents a unified evaluation of cross‑lingual consistency (CLC) enhancement methods for multilingual language models, covering inference‑time interventions and post‑training approaches across three model families and three closed‑form benchmarks. Results indicate that post‑training methods, especially direct distribution alignment, consistently improve CLC across all model‑dataset combinations, while other methods are more sensitive to answer format and language coverage. The study also examines the impact of CLC enhancement on culturally diverse question answering, finding no systematic degradation in controlled settings but occasional accuracy drops in open‑ended generation, particularly for non‑English responses.
arXiv:2510. 15551v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Any piece of knowledge is usually expressed in one or a handful of natural languages on the web or in any large corpus.
arXiv:2604.08974v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Uncertainty quantification techniques measure confidence in language model outputs to support critical applications like hallucination detection an...
arXiv:2607. 06327v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Uncertainty estimation (UE) enables LLM-powered systems to recognize when to abstain, yet existing research has predominantly focused on English.
arXiv:2608. 19323v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Uncertainty quantification (UQ) is essential for the safe deployment of large language models (LLMs).
arXiv:2604.13286v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Despite the widespread multilingual deployment of large language models, post-training pipelines remain predominantly English-centric, contributing...
The paper investigates how to fairly compare language models across languages, noting that current evaluation methods vary widely and lack empirical validation. By training controlled monolingual models on parallel data and testing multilingual LLMs, the authors find that many normalized metrics suffer from biases due to tokenization, encoding, and orthographic differences. Instead, they recommend using sentence‑level negative log‑likelihood over semantically equivalent sequences for more reliable cross‑lingual comparisons.
The paper investigates how multilingual large language models can be guided to reason more reliably in low- to mid-resource languages by selecting appropriate language modes during inference. Experiments with LLaMA and Qwen models show that using English context can correct errors from non‑English comprehension, but adding redundant bilingual context can cause interference. To balance this trade‑off, the authors propose Reliability‑Aware Adaptive Inference (RAAI), a training‑free test‑time framework that routes prompts based on Expected Calibration Error and gates reasoning with a mid‑layer Risk Index, achieving up to 37.7% accuracy gains and reduced calibration error on low‑resource languages.
arXiv:2607. 19101v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reliable Text Difficulty Assessment is a prerequisite for valid text simplification workflows and personalized learning applications.