The study compares an English-only and a bilingual decoder-only model, each 310 M parameters, trained on eight diverse languages while controlling for English exposure, compute, and document overlap. After aligning on shared English vocabulary, the authors find that token embeddings appear similar, but the deeper hidden states used for prediction diverge across models. This hidden‑state mismatch grows through middle transformer layers and persists despite controls, indicating that contextual processing differs between the models.
"whyItMatters":"The findings show that embedding alignment can conceal significant internal representation differences, which is crucial for any downstream work that assumes aligned multilingual models are interchangeable."
By Anjishnu Mukherjee, Ziwei Zhu, Antonios Anastasopoulos
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.
By Baban Gain, Trilok Nath Singh, Asif Ekbal
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.
By Ej Zhou, Caiqi Zhang, Tiancheng Hu, Chengzu Li, Nigel Collier, Ivan Vuli\'c, Anna Korhonen
The paper investigates whether training small decoder-only transformers on code‑switched text can induce cross‑lingual alignment. Using two 100‑million‑word multilingual corpora—one a mix of English, Dutch, and Chinese BabyBabelLM data, and another generated by inserting word‑ and sentence‑level code‑switching via an LLM—the authors find that code‑switched training aligns representations of parallel text, especially across different scripts, and that this alignment persists when later training on monolingual documents. A curriculum that progresses from word‑level code‑switching to sentence‑level code‑switching and finally to monolingual data yields models that outperform baselines on the BabyLM evaluation suite, demonstrating that code‑switching curriculum learning is an effective data augmentation strategy for multilingual pretraining.
By Dries Rooryck, Alex Cai, Yonatan Belinkov, David Alvarez-Melis, Kiant\'e Brantley
The paper investigates why large language models sometimes hallucinate when asked about facts in a language different from the one in which the facts were learned. By training small Transformer models on synthetic multilingual datasets, the authors show that the degree of correlation between facts and their learning language (informativeness) and the ease of language identification (extractability) determine whether models develop unified or separate representations across languages. Unified representations enable cross‑lingual fact transfer, while separate representations do not. The study proposes a unifying perspective on cross‑lingual transfer and suggests training methods to promote representational unification.
By Carter Blum, Katja Filippova, Ann Yuan, Asma Ghandeharioun, Julian Zimmert, Fred Zhang, Jessica Hoffmann, Tal Linzen, Martin Wattenberg, Lucas Dixon, Mor Geva
arXiv:2609.22633v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Bilingual language models (LMs) offer a controlled setting for studying how training conditions shape second-language (L2) behaviour, but prior work ty...
By Suchir Salhan, Catherine Arnett, James Michaelov, Paula Buttery
arXiv:2608.03446v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Multilingual large language models (LLMs) have been shown to perform better on non-English classification tasks when the representations of the giv...
By Adnan Al Ali, Kathy H\"ammerl, Jind\v{r}ich Libovick\'y, Alexander Fraser
arXiv:2601.16390v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Large language models exhibit strong multilingual capabilities, yet significant performance gaps persist between dominant and non-dominant la...
By Rhitabrat Pokharel, Ameeta Agrawal, Tanay Nagar
The paper challenges the assumption that improving cross‑lingual alignment automatically enhances cross‑lingual transfer. Using XLM‑R models aligned on token, sentence, and masked‑language‑modeling objectives across four language pairs, the authors evaluate zero‑shot transfer on part‑of‑speech tagging and sentence classification. They find that embedding‑based alignment metrics poorly predict downstream performance and that alignment and task gradients are often nearly orthogonal, especially when operating at different representational levels.
By Yana Veitsman, Yihong Liu, Hinrich Sch\"utze
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.
By Xiulin Yang, Ethan Gotlieb Wilcox, Catherine Arnett
The study investigates whether multilingual language models solve mathematical problems using shared or language‑specific internal representations. By replaying reasoning traces across six languages and applying Centered Kernel Alignment, the authors identify layers with cross‑language alignment and train two sparse autoencoders— a baseline and a new Geometry‑Invariant SAE (GI‑SAE) that adds an InfoNCE loss to encourage language‑agnostic activations. Functional interchangeability tests reveal that higher geometric similarity does not always translate to interchangeable features, and cross‑language sharing varies by model and depth, with GI‑SAE amplifying existing structure in some models but not others.
By Igor Bogdanov, Changcheng Huang
MIMO: Multilingual Information Retrieval via Monolingual Objectives proposes a two‑stage framework that first aligns a student model to a stable English semantic space using knowledge distillation, then jointly optimizes distillation and cross‑lingual contrastive learning to improve retrieval discrimination while preserving alignment. The approach addresses language clustering and the trade‑off between cross‑lingual alignment and embedding uniformity, outperforming existing cross‑lingual training baselines on both multilingual and multi‑monolingual benchmarks. MIMO also remains competitive with larger off‑the‑shelf models and its alignment‑uniformity analysis clarifies the distinct roles of the two loss components.
whyItMatters":"The study demonstrates a practical method to enhance multilingual information retrieval performance by balancing alignment and uniformity, which is crucial for real‑world search environments where queries and documents span multiple languages."
By Youngjoon Jang, Seongtae Hong, Heuiseok Lim