LLM debate is usually evaluated by final answers, yet transcripts reveal whether later turns develop new arguments or return to earlier claims in new wording. We study this process with \textit{prior-argument similarity}, which compares extracted argument units with earlier units in the same debate. In controlled eight-turn debates over 71 motions, six languages, and four model agents, Chinese is the only tested language with a consistently positive gap relative to English across three multilingual embedding models. The gap persists across agents, turn positions, regression adjustment, metric variants, extraction-length controls, a second-extractor subset, and cross-encoder tail rescoring. Manual calibration shows weak item-level alignment but a high-similarity tail enriched for substantive repetition. A diversity-aware prompt lowers \textit{prior-argument similarity} across languages, yet does not significantly narrow the Chinese--English gap. Multilingual debate evaluation should therefore measure argumentative development over time and report both average and gap terms.
Multilingual evaluations report accuracy at a single output-token cap, but languages need different numbers of tokens to express the same content, so the cap is a hidden experimental variable. We test whether the native-vs-translate gap on MGSM (German, Thai, Swahili) is a token-budget artifact for Qwen3-8B and Llama-3...
The Cross-Lingual Comprehension Gap (CLCG) is defined as the reduction in response quality when the same content and question are presented in a target language rather than in English.
It is found that LLMs can be moved toward reformulation and away from the sentence-by-sentence paradigm, though more work is needed to improve the effectiveness of those reformulations.
This work quantifies cross-lingual skill inconsistency orthogonally from knowledge and general benchmark performance via multilingual self-play, and shows that skill discrepancies are a measurable major roadblock in the development of truly multilingual models.
Bobby Cheng, Adam Gaber, Zhengzhe Liu et al.· 1 citation
DiaLLM is introduced, which continually pretrains three open-weight language model families on the International Corpus of English and applies implicit and explicit post-training paradigms, each combined with three model alignment strategies, giving the first controlled comparison of these components across Australian,...
Jordan Painter, Dipankar Srirag, Adarsh Kappiyath et al.· arXiv.org· 1 citation· ⚡1
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly evaluate human writing in high-stakes domains such as hiring and academic assessment, putting non-native speakers at particular risk. Drawing on the language attitudes framework, we compared human and LLM evaluations of parallel L1- and L2-written Japanese emails on three dimen...
