analiza aiqbench
This research reveals critical "language consistency breakdown" phenomena in multilingual reasoning models, where increased task difficulty can cause a sudden collapse in output language alignment, particularly for non-Latin scripts. The study demonstrates that accuracy alone is an insufficient metric for evaluating these systems, as models may preserve correctness by internally shifting to their dominant language while failing to maintain the requested linguistic context. These findings necessitate updated evaluation frameworks that jointly assess task accuracy, language consistency, and difficulty levels to ensure reliable multilingual AI deployment.
Hidden Language Consistency Phenomena in Reasoning LLMs
arXiv:2608.08447v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Multilingual reasoning models are commonly evaluated by whether they arrive at the correct answer, but not by whether they preserve the intended language while reasoning and responding. This omission conceals important multilingual behaviors that emerge as tasks become harder. In this paper, we study task difficulty, task accuracy, thinking-language consistency (TC), and answer-language consistency (AC) across reasoning models using PolyMath benchmark in eight languages and four difficulty levels. We uncover four findings: (1) language consistency exhibits four difficulty-dependent behaviors: output-language consistency remains aligned with input, remains misaligned, degrades gradually, or collapses abruptly. (2) We identify the language consistency breakdown effect, where increasing difficulty can cause a sudden drop in output-language consistency, especially in less strongly represented and non-Latin-script languages. (3) Due to this breakdown effect, accuracy can be preserved or even improved at a harder difficulty level as the model shifts to its internal dominant language. (4) Quantization can improve or degrade output-language consistency independently of its effect on accuracy, with GPTQ and AWQ often outperforming AutoRound under tolerance-based voting with {\epsilon} = 1.0. These results show that multilingual capability cannot be characterized by accuracy alone; reliable evaluation should jointly consider task accuracy, language consistency, and task difficulty for multilingual benchmarks.
Abstract:Multilingual reasoning models are commonly evaluated by whether they arrive at the correct answer, but not by whether they preserve the intended language while reasoning and responding. This omission conceals important multilingual behaviors that emerge as tasks become harder. In this paper, we study task difficulty, task accuracy, thinking-language consistency (TC), and answer-language consistency (AC) across reasoning models using PolyMath benchmark in eight languages and four difficulty levels. We uncover four findings: (1) language consistency exhibits four difficulty-dependent behaviors: output-language consistency remains aligned with input, remains misaligned, degrades gradually, or collapses abruptly. (2) We identify the language consistency breakdown effect, where increasing difficulty can cause a sudden drop in output-language consistency, especially in less strongly represented and non-Latin-script languages. (3) Due to this breakdown effect, accuracy can be preserved or even improved at a harder difficulty level as the model shifts to its internal dominant language. (4) Quantization can improve or degrade output-language consistency independently of its effect on accuracy, with GPTQ and AWQ often outperforming AutoRound under tolerance-based voting with {\epsilon} = 1.0. These results show that multilingual capability cannot be characterized by accuracy alone; reliable evaluation should jointly consider task accuracy, language consistency, and task difficulty for multilingual benchmarks.
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2608.08447 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2608.08447v2 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.08447 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 297 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Generalization and infinite width
LessWrong · 1 aug. 2026
The Continual Constitutional Convention: How language models revise the documents that govern them
AI Alignment Forum · 13 oct. 2026
A Large-Scale Chinese Knowledge Graph-Text Alignment Dataset for Benchmarking Knowledge-Grounded LLMs
arXiv · 18 aug. 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · 18 sept. 2026