arXiv Computation and Language
Lower-Resource, Higher Scores: Language Bias in LLM Evaluators
Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
Related stories
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 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 AI
Jun 30
The Heterogeneous Safety Impacts of Benign Multilingual Fine-Tuning
arXiv:2606. 28843v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Fine-tuning a large language model is a ubiquitous method for enhancing its capability on a specific downstream task.
arXiv AI
Jul 3
Multilingual Prompt Localization for Agent-as-a-Judge: Language and Backbone Sensitivity in Requirement-Level Evaluation
arXiv:2604. 04532v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Evaluation language is typically treated as a fixed English default in agentic code benchmarks, yet we show that changing the judge's language can invert backbone rankings.
arXiv AI
Aug 19
Benchmarking the Benchmarks: Evaluating Automated Safety Benchmarks for Small Language Models
The paper investigates whether existing AI safety benchmarks, designed for large language models, are suitable for evaluating small language models (SLMs). By testing five benchmark suites on 26 open‑source SLMs with a unified scoring rubric, the authors find that ambiguous judgments dominate, especially for complex prompts and certain architectures. This ambiguity, linked to factors like lexical density and output perplexity, undermines the reliability of aggregate leaderboards and reveals a confound between model capability and perceived safety.
arXiv AI
Jun 3
Decomposing and Measuring Evaluation Awareness
arXiv:2605. 23055v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Frontier language models sometimes recognize that they are being evaluated and adjust their behavior, undermining validity of benchmark results.