analiza aiqbench
The paper argues that LLM annotation quality depends heavily on how labels are collected. Batched chat-interface labeling produced near-chance inter-model agreement, while one-at-a-time annotation was more consistent but still failed on comments native speakers judged to express no persona, until abstention was allowed. For readers, the practical takeaways are that consistency is not validity, and that pluralistic-alignment evaluation in non-Western, code-mixed settings needs human-anchored gold sets and explicit abstention options.
NepPlural: A Human-Anchored Benchmark for Persona Annotation in Nepali Migration Discourse
arXiv:2610.15732v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Pluralistic alignment asks that language models faithfully represent a society's diverse, competing values rather than collapse them into one dominant viewpoint, yet flagship pluralistic-alignment datasets remain heavily skewed toward Western respondents. We introduce NepPlural, a human-anchored benchmark for modelling competing socio-cultural personas in Nepali public discourse on youth migration and brain drain. We curate 2,148 code-mixed (Devanagari, Romanized Nepali, English) YouTube comments, annotate them along a four-axis persona taxonomy (Intent, Primary Driver, Value Orientation, Affect) plus an explicit No-Persona class, and build a 300-comment gold set labelled independently by three native Nepali speakers (mean Fleiss' $\kappa \approx 0.55$). Using this gold set to audit automatic annotation, we find that LLM annotation reliability is driven by protocol. Labels collected in batches through chat interfaces reach only near-chance inter-model agreement ($\kappa \approx 0.17$). Annotating one comment at a time raises agreement above the native-speaker level ($\kappa \approx 0.72$), but consistency is not validity: under a forced-choice schema, models agree on personas for the 39% of comments native speakers judge to express none, keeping macro-F1 against human gold near 0.50. Allowing abstention resolves this: models recover No-Persona comments with F1 of 0.79 to 0.87 and, against leave-one-annotator-out references, match or exceed individual native speakers (macro-F1 0.75 to 0.86 vs. 0.75). Encoders fine-tuned on the batched labels reach only 0.34. Finally, a human-judged steerability probe finds that three frontier models adopt single persona axes with 59 to 77% fidelity but compose full personas only 33% of the time, with no congruence gap detected at this scale between Western-congruent and Nepali-collectivist personas.
Abstract:Pluralistic alignment asks that language models faithfully represent a society's diverse, competing values rather than collapse them into one dominant viewpoint, yet flagship pluralistic-alignment datasets remain heavily skewed toward Western respondents. We introduce NepPlural, a human-anchored benchmark for modelling competing socio-cultural personas in Nepali public discourse on youth migration and brain drain. We curate 2,148 code-mixed (Devanagari, Romanized Nepali, English) YouTube comments, annotate them along a four-axis persona taxonomy (Intent, Primary Driver, Value Orientation, Affect) plus an explicit No-Persona class, and build a 300-comment gold set labelled independently by three native Nepali speakers (mean Fleiss' $\kappa \approx 0.55$). Using this gold set to audit automatic annotation, we find that LLM annotation reliability is driven by protocol. Labels collected in batches through chat interfaces reach only near-chance inter-model agreement ($\kappa \approx 0.17$). Annotating one comment at a time raises agreement above the native-speaker level ($\kappa \approx 0.72$), but consistency is not validity: under a forced-choice schema, models agree on personas for the 39% of comments native speakers judge to express none, keeping macro-F1 against human gold near 0.50. Allowing abstention resolves this: models recover No-Persona comments with F1 of 0.79 to 0.87 and, against leave-one-annotator-out references, match or exceed individual native speakers (macro-F1 0.75 to 0.86 vs. 0.75). Encoders fine-tuned on the batched labels reach only 0.34. Finally, a human-judged steerability probe finds that three frontier models adopt single persona axes with 59 to 77% fidelity but compose full personas only 33% of the time, with no congruence gap detected at this scale between Western-congruent and Nepali-collectivist personas.
Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2610.15732 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2610.15732v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.15732 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
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 · 352 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

[AINews] Reality Checks on AI News (Yegge shuts down Gas Town, Databricks’ +60% Astra cost)
Latent Space · 17 sept. 2026
To Memories and Beyond: From Remembering to Knowing You across Long-Term Multimodal Personal Archives
arXiv · 18 sept. 2026

MedPAIR: Measuring Whether Physicians and AI Agree on What Matters in Medical QA
Snorkel AI Blog · 2 oct. 2026

RCP-nDCG@10: A more complete way to measure retrieval relevance
Cohere · 30 sept. 2026