Almanac
← Events
5arXiv cs.CL (Computation and Language)·24d ago

Towards Reliable Multilingual LLMs-as-a-Judge: An Empirical Study

This paper systematically investigates strategies for extending LLM-based automatic evaluation (LLMs-as-a-Judge) to multilingual settings, covering high-, mid-, and low-resource languages (English, Spanish, Basque). The authors compare instruction translation, monolingual vs. multilingual supervision, and model size, finding that fine-tuned smaller models can match proprietary models when in-domain data is available, while zero-shot larger models are preferable out-of-domain. Two meta-evaluation datasets are extended to Spanish and Basque, and all data and code are publicly released.

Related guides (2)

Related events (8)

5Hugging Face Blog·1mo ago·source ↗

Judge Arena: Benchmarking LLMs as Evaluators

Hugging Face and Atla have launched Judge Arena, a platform for benchmarking large language models in their role as automated evaluators. The initiative uses an Elo-based ranking system to compare how well different LLMs judge the quality of model outputs, addressing the growing reliance on LLM-as-judge paradigms in evaluation pipelines. This fills a meta-evaluation gap: as LLM judges become standard practice, understanding their relative reliability and biases becomes critical infrastructure for the field.

4arXiv · cs.CL·20d ago·source ↗

Benchmarking Local LLMs for Confidential Translation Workflows

This paper evaluates locally runnable LLMs (via Ollama) for offline, privacy-constrained translation workflows targeting freelance translators and smaller language service providers. The authors expand their Reeve Foundation corpus to include German and Simplified Chinese, then benchmark local models across four language directions against commercial NMTs (DeepL, Baidu), a frontier LLM (GPT-5.2), and professional local NMT systems. Results show substantial performance variation by language direction and model size, with the best local LLMs matching or exceeding local NMT systems and the frontier LLM, though falling short of top commercial NMTs. The study supports the viability of local LLMs for confidentiality-sensitive translation use cases.

4Hugging Face Blog·1mo ago·source ↗

Letting Large Models Debate: The First Multilingual LLM Debate Competition

Hugging Face introduces a multilingual LLM debate competition where large language models compete against each other in structured debates. The initiative explores multi-agent interaction, argumentation quality, and cross-lingual reasoning capabilities. This represents an evaluation framework for assessing LLM persuasion, coherence, and multilingual performance in adversarial settings.

6arXiv · cs.CL·18d ago·source ↗

Adversarial robustness and safety alignment in multilingual multimodal LLMs: cross-lingual vulnerability and 'safety-by-failure'

A systematic study evaluates adversarial robustness and safety alignment of multimodal LLMs across 12 languages, finding that adversarial images optimized in one language transfer to others (cross-lingual transferability). The paper introduces the concept of 'safety-by-failure': low-resource languages appear safer not due to genuine alignment but because models fail to comprehend harmful instructions in those languages. Models like Qwen3-VL that integrate multilingual capability throughout training (rather than only at instruction tuning) show genuine cross-lingual safety with active refusal. The findings challenge the assumption that low-resource language safety metrics reflect real alignment.

3arXiv · cs.CL·16d ago·source ↗

First Komi-Yazva–Russian parallel corpus and LLM translation evaluation protocol for endangered low-resource language

Researchers introduce the first Komi-Yazva–Russian parallel corpus of 457 aligned sentence pairs from 74 narrative texts, paired with a rigorous evaluation protocol for studying LLM translation under extreme data scarcity. The protocol includes story-level cross-validation, deterministic retrieval-based few-shot prompting, and both reference-based and judge-based metrics to ensure leakage-aware, reproducible evaluation. Results show LLMs produce non-trivial translations but performance varies strongly by model family; retrieval-based few-shot prompting consistently outperforms zero-shot, though gains plateau quickly. The work frames the corpus as both a dataset contribution and a reproducible testbed for endangered-language machine translation research.

6arXiv · cs.AI·19d ago·source ↗

Mitigating Perceptual Judgment Bias in Multimodal LLM-as-a-Judge via Perceptual Perturbation and Reward Modeling

This paper identifies and analyzes 'Perceptual Judgment Bias' in multimodal LLM judges, where models anchor on response text rather than visual evidence when the two conflict. The authors introduce a Perceptually Perturbed Judgment Dataset using counterfactual responses to isolate perceptual errors, and a training framework combining GRPO-based reward modeling with batch-ranking objectives. Experiments on MLLM-as-a-Judge benchmarks show improved perceptual fidelity, ranking coherence, and alignment with human evaluation.

5arXiv · cs.CL·1mo ago·source ↗

Text Analytics Evaluation Framework: Benchmarking LLMs on Social Media NLP Tasks

Researchers introduce a 470-question evaluation framework to assess LLM performance on aggregated social media text, applied to Twitter datasets across sentiment analysis, hate speech detection, and emotion recognition. Results show performance degrades substantially as input scale exceeds 500 instances, particularly for open-weights models on numerical tasks. Multi-label and target-dependent scenarios also show notable performance drops, and task complexity progressively erodes accuracy from basic semantic identification to comparison and counting operations. The findings point to architectural bottlenecks in current LLMs for rigorous quantitative analysis over large text collections.

4Hugging Face Blog·1mo ago·source ↗

Very Large Language Models and How to Evaluate Them

This Hugging Face blog post from October 2022 discusses approaches to zero-shot evaluation of large language models hosted on the Hub. It covers methodologies for benchmarking LLMs without task-specific fine-tuning, addressing the practical challenges of evaluating very large models at scale. The post situates evaluation tooling within the broader ecosystem of open model hosting and assessment.