aiqbench analysis
This study provides critical insights into uncertainty estimation for large language models across 22 languages, revealing that generation-language alignment significantly impacts reliability more than input-language comprehension. The findings offer actionable guidance on selecting appropriate evaluation methods based on model scale and optimizing abstention thresholds in multilingual environments. These results are essential for building robust, trustworthy AI systems capable of operating safely beyond English-centric contexts.
Estimating Uncertainty from Reasoning: A Large-Scale Study of Multi- and Crosslingual MCQA Performance in LLMs
arXiv:2607.06327v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Uncertainty estimation (UE) enables LLM-powered systems to recognize when to abstain, yet existing research has predominantly focused on English. We present the first large-scale evaluation of UE methods across 22 languages, spanning high-, mid-, and low-resource settings. Using two human-curated Q&A datasets, we compare open and closed box UE methods (nine in total) across different model sizes and architectures while eliciting long-form reasoning, avoiding LLM-as-a-judge and embedding-based scoring, which can introduce evaluation noise. We report three main actionable findings. First, we find that prompting models to reason in English while keeping questions in low-resource languages substantially improves UE performance, suggesting that comprehension of low-resource languages is largely intact, and that the reliability bottleneck lies in generation rather than understanding. Second, prompting models to reason in English closes the UE performance gap between low and high-resource languages, demonstrating that generation language matters more than the question language. Third, the choice of UE method should depend on model scale: at smaller scales, open-box probability-based methods outperform alternatives; at larger scales, closed-box self-verbalized uncertainty becomes superior. Finally, we provide an analysis of threshold selection for selective prediction, offering guidance on calibrating abstention in multilingual settings.
Abstract:Uncertainty estimation (UE) enables LLM-powered systems to recognize when to abstain, yet existing research has predominantly focused on English. We present the first large-scale evaluation of UE methods across 22 languages, spanning high-, mid-, and low-resource settings. Using two human-curated Q&A datasets, we compare open and closed box UE methods (nine in total) across different model sizes and architectures while eliciting long-form reasoning, avoiding LLM-as-a-judge and embedding-based scoring, which can introduce evaluation noise. We report three main actionable findings. First, we find that prompting models to reason in English while keeping questions in low-resource languages substantially improves UE performance, suggesting that comprehension of low-resource languages is largely intact, and that the reliability bottleneck lies in generation rather than understanding. Second, prompting models to reason in English closes the UE performance gap between low and high-resource languages, demonstrating that generation language matters more than the question language. Third, the choice of UE method should depend on model scale: at smaller scales, open-box probability-based methods outperform alternatives; at larger scales, closed-box self-verbalized uncertainty becomes superior. Finally, we provide an analysis of threshold selection for selective prediction, offering guidance on calibrating abstention in multilingual settings.
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2607.06327 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2607.06327v3 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.06327 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 288 words
Related coverage
State of the Field: AI for Epistemics and Coordination
LessWrong · Oct 2, 2026

Expenditure Horizon: Measuring Optimization Ability, with an Application to NanoGPT
METR · Jul 21, 2026

The Machines that Make the Machines
NVIDIA · Oct 7, 2026

Lattice-Based Cryptography Explained
Quantum Zeitgeist · Aug 15, 2026