arXiv Computation and Language By Kazuhiro Yamauchi, Marie Katsurai

Improving Cross-Lingual Transfer for Sequential Sentence Classification in Research Papers via Structural Similarity

Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →

The paper investigates cross‑lingual transfer for sequential sentence classification (SSC) in research papers, focusing on 13 non‑English languages. Experiments show that linguistic proximity does not reliably predict transfer success, whereas structural similarity in rhetorical organization—particularly label distribution similarity—correlates positively with performance. The authors introduce three generative‑model methods that exploit structural cues, achieving parity with strong encoder baselines on‑domain and outperforming them when transferring to unseen languages.

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 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.

By Xiulin Yang, Ethan Gotlieb Wilcox, Catherine Arnett
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 11

Structural priors for data-efficient language learning

The paper explores structural transfer, where models are first trained on non-language data such as music, probabilistic grammars, and cellular automata to induce priors for natural language tasks. This pretraining acts as a weight initialization for multilingual language modeling and leads to lower next-token prediction loss and smaller weight shifts during subsequent language training. However, the improved loss does not consistently translate into better downstream linguistic performance, and the efficiency of non-language data is lower than that of additional language data.

By Yana Veitsman, Jonas Mayer Martins, Jonathan Lautenschlager, Lisa Beinborn