arXiv:2606. 12392v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recently, large language models (LLMs) have achieved promising progress in the fields of classical Chinese translation and the generation of classical poetry.
Recently, large language models (LLMs) have achieved promising progress in the fields of classical Chinese translation and the generation of classical poetry. However, domain-specific research on precise translation and affective-semantic understanding of classical poetry remains limited.
Neo-Classic is a new benchmark designed to evaluate linguistic‑aesthetic reasoning in Classical Chinese poetry. It uses an out‑of‑sample dataset of strictly metrical poems written by contemporary experts and a set of reverse‑understanding probes, avoiding reliance on historical corpora. Experiments with leading LLMs show a 20–50% performance drop on contemporary texts and low accuracy (0–13%) on discourse‑level ordering, indicating that current models excel at local patterns but struggle with global hierarchical planning.
arXiv:2608. 11452v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Text-to-image (T2I) models are increasingly asked to illustrate literary and cultural content, yet we cannot measure how well an image renders the meaning of a poem.
The paper introduces Peony, a benchmark designed to evaluate large language models’ ability to comprehend the ‘poetic logic’ of modern Chinese poetry. It defines this logic through four tasks across stanza, line, and imagery levels and tests six mainstream LLMs under both non‑thinking and thinking configurations. Results show current LLMs struggle with this literary reasoning, highlighting Peony’s role in revealing these limitations.
arXiv:2609.23951v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Expressive speech synthesis has advanced through prosody modeling, yet generating structured poetic speech, such as haiku, remains challenging. Prior w...
arXiv:2606. 05924v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Literary translation poses unique challenges due to the scarcity of high-quality annotated data and the need to balance expression fluency with literary effect.
LuxIT is a monolingual instruction‑tuning dataset for Luxembourgish, created by synthesizing instruction‑answer pairs from native texts using the DeepSeek‑R1‑0528 model and a quality‑assurance LLM‑as‑judge process. The resulting 227,507 high‑quality pairs were used to fine‑tune 14 LLMs (≤15 B parameters), yielding an average accuracy increase of +5.37 percentage points on standardized Luxembourgish proficiency exams and improvements in macro‑averaged F1 on nine of the fourteen downstream NLP tasks. These findings demonstrate that synthetic monolingual data can effectively enhance LLM performance in low‑resource languages and reveal the complex relationship between exam performance and practical NLP gains.
arXiv:2510. 06039v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Reliable evaluation of knowledge-grounded Large Language Models (LLMs) in Chinese requires resources that explicitly align Chinese-language text with verifiable Knowledge Graph (KG) facts.
Large language models (LLMs) achieve strong relation extraction (RE), but their computational demands and reliance on proprietary APIs limit deployment in resource-constrained or privacy-sensitive settings. We investigate how far small language models (SLMs) can close this gap across general-domain and literary text.
arXiv:2609.18156v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Teochew has a substantial speaker community and exhibits distinctive lexical, syntactic, and pragmatic features, yet textual resources for evaluating l...
Teochew has a substantial speaker community and exhibits distinctive lexical, syntactic, and pragmatic features, yet textual resources for evaluating large language models remain limited. We present T...
The paper presents a corpus of 1,262 Classical Tamil verse‑commentary pairs and evaluates several neural representation learning models—including recurrent, Transformer, Siamese, mBART‑style encoder‑decoder, and decoder‑only language models—against a TF‑IDF baseline. Experiments reveal limited gains: token‑F1 scores range from 0.02 to 0.20, the encoder‑decoder continues to lower training loss even after validation loss rises, and the decoder‑only model only reproduces authentic word order in 95.5% of minimal‑pair tests but fails to generate held‑out commentary content. The authors release the extraction and evaluation protocol while noting that redistribution of the source commentaries requires permission.