arXiv:2508. 08879v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The growing deployment of large language models (LLMs) across diverse cultural contexts necessitates a deeper understanding of models' hidden representations of different cultures.
By Haeun Yu, Arnav Arora Seogyeong Jeong, Nadav Borenstein, Siddhesh Pawar, Jisu Shin, Jiho Jin, Junho Myung, Alice Oh, Isabelle Augenstein
arXiv:2601. 14063v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Cross-cultural competence in large language models (LLMs) requires understanding and adapting Culture-Specific Items (CSIs) across varying cultural contexts.
By Mohsinul Kabir, Tasnim Ahmed, Md Mezbaur Rahman, Shaoxiong Ji, Hassan Alhuzali, Yuechen Jiang, Jimin Huang, Sophia Ananiadou
CHARM is a multicultural benchmark that tests large language models’ ability to adopt a character’s style while respecting knowledge boundaries. It includes 40 real and fictional characters from five cultural-linguistic regions and evaluates two boundary types—Temporal and Cross-Universe—using abstention-enabled multiple-choice questions. The study finds that hallucinations mainly stem from compliance failures: models often recognize a query is out of scope yet still provide out-of-character answers, revealing systematic cultural variations in these errors.
By Sunkyung Han, Nahyeon Park, Gaeun Seo, Seunghyun Yoon, JinYeong Bak
arXiv:2606. 07422v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models are increasingly used to answer culturally grounded questions across languages, yet it remains unclear whether local cultural knowledge is better accessed through English or the local language.
By Yang Zhang, Xiao Fei, Amr Mohamed, Sarah Almeida Carneiro, Mersin Konomi, Mingmeng Geng, Ahmed Asaad, Guokan Shang, Michalis Vazirgiannis
The study investigates whether large language models (LLMs) are more prone to errors when they doubt the plausibility of input data, a phenomenon termed context‑memory conflict. Using non‑English and low‑resource language datasets, the authors generate text from factual, counterfactual, and fictional RDF triples in English, Czech, Slovak, and Upper Sorbian, and evaluate faithfulness with both human annotations and an LLM judge (Kimi K3). Contrary to expectations, the results show only a weak context‑memory conflict: counterfactual inputs receive slightly lower faithfulness scores than factual ones, and the choice of LLM judge can significantly affect perceived conflict strength.
By Peter Kochelka, Ale\v{s} Manuel Pap\'a\v{c}ek, Vojt\v{e}ch Dvo\v{r}\'ak, Ond\v{r}ej Du\v{s}ek
Camellia is a new benchmark that tests cultural bias in large language models (LLMs) across nine Asian languages and six Asian cultures. It contains 19,530 manually annotated entities linked to Asian or Western cultures and 2,173 masked social‑media contexts for these entities. Using Camellia, the authors evaluate four multilingual LLMs on cultural context adaptation, sentiment association, and entity extractive QA, finding that models struggle with cultural adaptation, exhibit differing biases across regions and families, and have difficulty understanding context in some Asian languages.
By Tarek Naous, Anagha Savit, Carlos Rafael Catalan, Geyang Guo, Jaehyeok Lee, Kyungdon Lee, Lheane Marie Dizon, Mengyu Ye, Neel Kothari, Sahajpreet Singh, Sarah Masud, Tanish Patwa, Trung Thanh Tran, Zohaib Khan, Alan Ritter, Tanmoy Chakraborty, Yuki Arase, Keisuke Sakaguchi, JinYeong Bak, Wei Xu