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.
By Tom\'a\v{s} Burkert, Angelika Peljak-{\L}api\'nska, David Zelen\'y
The paper investigates how the language of prompts and responses affects large language model (LLM) outputs. Using five models and 68 non‑translation questions, the authors compare English‑to‑English, English‑to‑Norwegian, Norwegian‑to‑Norwegian, and Norwegian‑to‑English conditions, yielding 1,348 responses after filtering. They find that prompt language strongly influences response length—Norwegian prompts shorten English outputs by ~37 % and English prompts shorten Norwegian outputs by ~41 %—while semantic similarity remains high across conditions.
By Thi Thanh Nhan Nguyen, Mai Khoi Tieu, Michael A. Riegler, P{\aa}l Halvorsen, Thu Nguyen
arXiv:2601. 22888v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: More than 80% of the 1.
By Jio Oh, Paul Vicinanza, Thomas Butler, Steven Euijong Whang, Dezhi Hong, Amani Namboori
The paper investigates whether language models’ self-reported confidence is meaningful without additional training. By evaluating three training‑free signals—direct verbalization, post‑hoc probability estimates, and agreement across multiple generations—on 100 TriviaQA questions, the authors find that direct verbalization alone achieves high AUROC scores (0.956 and 0.937) for correctness prediction, while agreement-based methods perform noticeably worse. Re‑eliciting confidence for the same answers shows modest score shifts and occasional decision flips, and an audit of biography claims reveals only a small confidence gap between supported and contradicted statements.
By Lukas Meyer, Sofia Rossi, Wei Chen, Thomas Laurent, Yiming Li
arXiv:2607. 20526v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in settings where fluent but incorrect answers can be costly.
By Matthew ffrench-Constant, Daniel Yang, Xinmeng Huang, Sanyam Kapoor
LuxIT is a monolingual instruction‑tuning dataset for Luxembourgish, created by synthesizing instruction‑answer pairs from native texts using the DeepSeek‑R1‑0528 model and a quality‑assurance LLM‑as‑judge process. The resulting 227,507 high‑quality pairs were used to fine‑tune 14 LLMs (≤15 B parameters), yielding an average accuracy increase of +5.37 percentage points on standardized Luxembourgish proficiency exams and improvements in macro‑averaged F1 on nine of the fourteen downstream NLP tasks. These findings demonstrate that synthetic monolingual data can effectively enhance LLM performance in low‑resource languages and reveal the complex relationship between exam performance and practical NLP gains.
By Julian Valline, Cedric Lothritz, Siwen Guo, Jordi Cabot