SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2604.03592

Unveiling Language Routing Isolation in Multilingual MoE Models for Interpretable Subnetwork Adaptation

Abstract

Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models exhibit striking performance disparities across languages, yet the internal mechanisms driving these gaps remain poorly understood. In this work, we conduct a systematic analysis of expert routing patterns in MoE models, revealing a phenomenon we term Language Routing Isolation, in which high- and low-resource languages tend to activate largely disjoint expert sets. Through layer-stratified analysis, we further show that routing patterns exhibit a layer-wise convergence-divergence pattern across model depth. Building on these findings, we propose RISE (Routing Isolation-guided Subnetwork Enhancement), a framework that exploits routing isolation to identify and adapt language-specific expert subnetworks. RISE applies a tripartite selection strategy, using specificity scores to identify language-specific experts in shallow and deep layers and overlap scores to select universal experts in middle layers. By training only the selected subnetwork while freezing all other parameters, RISE substantially improves low-resource language performance while preserving capabilities in other languages. Experiments on 10 languages demonstrate that RISE achieves target-language F1 gains of up to 10.85% with minimal cross-lingual degradation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Kening Zheng, Wei-Chieh Huang, Jiahao Huo, Zhonghao Li, Henry Peng Zou, Yibo Yan, Xin Zou, Jungang Li, Junzhuo Li, Hanrong Zhang, Xuming Hu, Philip S. Yu. 2026-08-31. Unveiling Language Routing Isolation in Multilingual MoE Models for Interpretable Subnetwork Adaptation. https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.03592

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related discoveries

When Robots Mishear Us: Mapping the Safety Risks of Voice-Controlled Embodied AI

We investigate whether automatic speech recognition (ASR) errors in user input can lead to unsafe outputs from Embodied AI (EAI) models. We find that ASR errors can lead to harmful instructions being accepted and executed by EAI models, thereby reducing safety. We simulate ASR errors and combine them with existing safety benchmarks (SafeAgentBench and POEX) to evaluate how different errors affect embodied AI safety. We find that some of them preserve semantic structure but increase harmful ambiguity, while others weaken the model refusal behaviour and allow unsafe plans to be generated and executed. We show that in some cases automatic correction of ASR errors can reduce the risk, but this is not always effective. Overall, we show that ASR errors lead to significant safety risks for embodied AI.

cs.AI

Sleight of Word Benchmark: Can Language Models Notice If Their Own Output Was Tampered With?

The output of a Language Model can be tampered with \emph{while} the model is writing it. A simple test can thus be constructed by evaluating the model's perception of this external perturbation. In this spirit, a simple benchmark is built in which a single word is consistently substituted with another in the generation process. We call this method \emph{Sleight of Word}. Two distinct axes are measured: metrics that relate to the model's surprise, as well as an evaluation of the textual reaction for 19 different open-weight language models.

cs.CL

TCS-BENCH: Benchmarking State-of-the-Art Generative AI Theoretical Computer Science Research Ability

We introduce TCS-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) on research-level Theoretical Computer Science (TCS) proof generation. TCS-Bench consists of theorem-proving tasks from papers published at top theoretical computer science venues (STOC, FOCS, and SODA). Each task provides the necessary context to derive a self-contained proof for a target result. We evaluate state-of-the-art models on this benchmark. We verify the correctness of generated proofs via a verification agent, and further benchmark the verifier against human-expert proof judgements on a set of target statements and generated proofs pairs. Our reference verifier achieves over 90% accuracy on the expert labeled set.

cs.CL