arXiv Computation and Language By Wei Sun, Marie-Francine Moens

Cross-lingual Representation Learning via Centroid Intervention Fusion

Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →

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.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Computation and Language.

arXiv AI
2d ago

Beyond the Rosetta Stone: Unification Forces in Generalization Dynamics

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 Computation and Language
3d ago

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.

By Xiulin Yang, Ethan Gotlieb Wilcox, Catherine Arnett