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 study investigates whether monolingual language models, trained without joint multilingual objectives, develop cross-lingual alignment. By evaluating models such as Goldfish and independently built monolingual systems, the authors find that alignable representational geometry emerges across layers, strengthening with larger data, larger models, or closer linguistic proximity. A single Procrustes rotation on parallel sentences can map hidden states between models, and applying this rotation to a German model’s residuals swaps factual predictions to those of the donor English model, demonstrating functional transfer.
By Ej Zhou, Suchir Salhan, Catherine Arnett, Anna Korhonen
The paper introduces Centroid Intervention Fusion (CIF), a framework that merges multiple multilingual intervention projections into a single language-shared operator for inference-time modification of large language models. CIF improves cross-lingual transfer without updating model parameters and achieves up to +3.378 percentage points better performance than prior pairwise intervention baselines across several benchmarks, including low-resource languages. The authors provide code at https://github.com/VRCMF/CIF.git.
By Wei Sun, Marie-Francine Moens
arXiv:2606. 01800v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have excelled in processing multiple languages through pre- and post-training on multilingual data, even though English dominates the training data.
By Haruki Sakajo, Yusuke Sakai, Hidetaka Kamigaito, Taro Watanabe
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.
By Vihari Piratla, Purvam Jain, Darshan Singh, Trevor Cohn, Preethi Jyothi, Partha Talukdar
The study evaluates how different input representations—orthographic text, IPA transcription, and romanization—affect cross‑lingual transfer in autoregressive multilingual language models. Across three model sizes and eight languages grouped into typologically motivated pairs, romanized pretraining consistently outperforms native orthography and IPA, especially as model scale increases. Fine‑tuning a text‑pretrained model on romanized data can harm performance on languages already covered by the base model, suggesting romanization should be integrated at pretraining rather than applied later.
By Muge Zhang, Aaron Jencks, Krishna Badikela, Yulia Tsvetkov, Sachin Kumar