arXiv AI
Challenges and Recommendations for LLM-as-a-Judge in Multilingual Settings and for Low-Resource Languages
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Jul 3
Challenges and Recommendations for LLMs-as-a-Judge in Multilingual Settings and Low-Resource Languages
arXiv:2607. 02235v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-as-a-Judge has become the dominant evaluation paradigm for many natural language generation tasks, due to shortcomings of conventional metrics and high correlations with human judgment, albeit mostly in English.
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 27
Lower-Resource, Higher Scores: Language Bias in LLM Evaluators
The paper demonstrates that large language model (LLM) evaluators, whether reward‑model based or prompted LLM‑as‑a‑Judge, exhibit significant language bias in multilingual settings. Experiments with semantically identical instruction‑response pairs across 23 languages reveal that lower‑resource languages receive higher scores, a bias that persists across eight open‑weight evaluators and is not detectable by standard pairwise accuracy metrics. The authors link the bias to model uncertainty and language identity, showing it cannot be explained by content difficulty alone.
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 27
Apples to Apples? Towards Comparable Crosslingual Language Model Evaluation
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.
arXiv AI
Sep 3
Evaluating the Evaluator: Summarization Metrics and LLM-Judges beyond English
The paper introduces BASSE, a multilingual meta‑evaluation dataset containing 2,040 human‑rated abstractive summaries produced manually or by five LLMs with four prompts. Annotators scored each summary on coherence, consistency, fluency, relevance, and 5W1H using a 5‑point Likert scale. Benchmarking shows proprietary LLM‑judge models best align with human judgments, followed by criteria‑specific automatic metrics, while open‑source judge LLMs perform poorly.
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 5
M-GATE: Multilingual Grammar, Accuracy in Translation, and Efficiency Benchmark for Large Language Models
arXiv:2608. 03803v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multilingual language models are deployed across a hundred or more languages, yet most benchmarks test whether a model can perform a task _in_ a language rather than whether it commands the language itself, conflating fluency with proficiency.
arXiv Computation and Language
2d ago
MultiSynt/MT: Trillion-Token Multi-Parallel Pre-Training Data Translated Across 36 Languages
arXiv:2607.00890v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Open web-scale pre-training corpora remain concentrated in English, limiting multilingual LLM development. We introduce MultiSynt/MT, an open synth...