The paper proposes treating translation as a structured decision space explored by multiple autonomous agents, rather than producing a single output. Using Turkish–Syrian Arabic dialogue, three agents—zero‑shot, dialect‑stabilized, and pivot translation—are compared on 5,000 sentences, with stabilization nearly doubling dialect marker usage and reducing structural instability. The study introduces an interpretability framework that quantifies decision flexibility through dialect marker frequency, lexical proximity, and structural variance.
arXiv:2609.23490v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly execute multi-step workflows through tool use and interaction with users and environments. However, curr...
The paper introduces a three‑layer checklist-and-judge framework to evaluate interpreter agents that mediate live conversation across languages. It assesses semantic, pragmatic, and cultural‑social dimensions—naturalness, intent, and social appropriateness—rather than just fidelity, in both single‑turn and multi‑turn settings. Extensive validation shows that conventional MT metrics miss failures in stronger interpreters, and that context, structured instructions, and cultural cues influence communicative success.
The paper investigates weight‑space merging of independently fine‑tuned multilingual machine translation models. Experiments show that merging is more successful when models share a target language, yet it still cannot match the peak performance of language‑specific checkpoints. When target languages differ, performance drops sharply, and analysis reveals that overlapping neuron activation and incompatible upper‑layer geometries cause these failures.
The study evaluates Arabic–Russian machine translation by comparing seven fine‑tuned neural machine translation (NMT) models with four few‑shot large language models (LLMs) on a new 15.47 million‑pair corpus split into 20k/5k/5k. Fine‑tuned NLLB‑1.3B achieves the best performance (BLEU 16.3, COMET 0.738), while the best few‑shot LLM, Aya‑Expanse 8B, scores only BLEU 1.7 on 500 sentences. Error analysis shows that low lexical overlap between Arabic and Russian is the main source of failures, and statistical tests confirm significant performance gaps between most models.
arXiv:2608. 07629v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multilingual neural machine translation models such as NLLB-200 cover 200 languages but leave thousands unsupported, including most Grassfields Bantu languages of Cameroon.
Large language models show strong cross‑lingual abilities, but previous studies have examined them only at isolated training points. This work pretrains a 1.7B multilingual model on nine languages, recording checkpoints at fine granularity to track translation development. Using word‑level translation and a new dataset, the authors find that early learning is dominated by token‑level copying and surface similarities, while later stages involve more general translation mechanisms and refined copying.
arXiv:2608. 04586v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have achieved significant success in speech-to-text translation (S2TT).
arXiv:2608. 04586v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have achieved significant success in speech-to-text translation (S2TT).
arXiv:2609.15079v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-agent LLM architectures, such as LangChain and AutoGen, largely assume English as the lingua franca for internal inter-agent communication, eve...
arXiv:2609.22796v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Dialectal Arabic machine translation (MT) remains challenging despite recent progress in Arabic language technologies, particularly because effective t...
arXiv:2608.12018v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Neural Machine Translation (NMT) and Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at cross-lingual tasks but often fail to capture intra-lingual morphologica...
Agentic benchmarks aim to measure how well AI agents plan, search, execute, and recover within realistic multi-tool environments, but they are almost exclusively in English. As AI agents are globally deployed to a linguistically diverse user base, whether agentic competence measured in English transfers to other languages remains an open question.