arXiv subjects

Catherine Arnett

Publications and source records attributed to Catherine Arnett.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

BuzzASR: A Swarm of 100+ Monolingual Speech Recognition Models

We introduce BuzzASR, a collection of language-specialized fine-tuned Whisper models adapted for automatic speech recognition (ASR) in 102 languages. Large end-to-end Transformer-based ASR models such as Whisper have revolutionized ASR, but most prominent models are highly multilingual. As a result, these models often perform poorly on languages less well-represented in their training set. While it has long been known that effective language adaptation can be achieved through simple fine-tuning on monolingual data, this strategy has only been applied to a small number of languages. We massively scale up this simple approach to 102 languages covered in the FLEURS dataset, while also implementing a more complex language adaptation strategy that integrates monolingual tokenizer replacement and data augmentation using text-only fine-tuning. BuzzASR models outperform Whisper-large-v3 on 77 out of 102 languages, reducing character error rates (CER) by a factor of over 2.8 on average. Our models achieve state-of-the-art CER among open-source systems on 27 of 102 languages on the combined FLEURS and Common Voice test set. Our tokenizer replacement strategy yields an average 3.3x improvement in compression rate (characters per token) over Whisper's multilingual BPE, with gains of up to 21.7x. We release all models, code, and detailed results: https://lemn-lab.github.io/buzz-asr

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Apples to Apples? Towards Comparable Crosslingual Language Model Evaluation

Crosslingual evaluation of language models that enables fair comparisons remains a fundamental challenge in multilingual NLP. Existing studies adopt a variety of downstream tasks and intrinsic metrics with different theoretical justifications, yet there has been little empirical investigation into whether these approaches yield meaningful crosslingual conclusions. We systematically examine crosslingual evaluation approaches using controlled monolingual language models trained on parallel data with varying tokenizer vocabulary sizes and model sizes, and further validate our findings on multilingual LLMs. We further discuss challenges in achieving comparable downstream evaluation across languages. Our results show that several widely used normalized metrics introduce crosslinguistic biases rooted in tokenization, encoding, and orthographic differences. In contrast, sentence-level negative log-likelihood computed over semantically equivalent sequences provides more meaningful and consistent crosslingual comparisons.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Cross-Lingual Alignment Without Joint Training: Do Monolingual Language Models Converge on Universal Representations?

Cross-lingual alignment in multilingual language models is typically attributed to joint training: shared parameters, mixed-language batches, or explicit alignment objectives. We ask whether monolingual models trained on non-parallel data learn alignable representations without joint training. By testing on strictly monolingual language models, such as the Goldfish model families and independently developed models from different research labs, we find three results. Correlation: these models develop alignable representational geometry across layers, with alignment strengthening as data scale, model scale, or linguistic proximity increases. Construction: a single Procrustes rotation fit on parallel sentences maps hidden states between models. Causation: the same rotation transfers functional content; patching a rotated English residual into a German model on a factual cloze flips the prediction to the donor's capital in most cases. We confirm that cross-lingual alignment can emerge from the structure of language and the information it carries rather than from joint training, and this points to practical future directions including model stitching, merging, and modular multilingual systems built from monolingual components.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Skill Issue: Are Skills Language-Invariant in LLMs?

Large language models access knowledge inconsistently across languages, but to what extent do they differ in their skill sets when interacting with different languages? This work quantifies cross-lingual skill inconsistency orthogonally from knowledge and general benchmark performance. We do this via multilingual self-play: two instances of the same model compete in a text-based game, each interacting through a different language interface. Since the model, opponent, rules, state space, and available actions remain fixed, this setting isolates the effect of language on the model's realized behavior. We build a multilingual extension to TextArena and evaluate three open-weight models across eight languages and six games covering spatial reasoning, imperfect information, resource allocation, and repeated interaction. We find that the same model can exhibit markedly different playing strength across languages, with systematic variation in win--loss margins, invalid actions, and strategic tendencies. Detailed analyses reveal language-specific failures in spatial reasoning, card-conditioned decisions, and optimal move selection. In some settings, changing only the intermediate reasoning language recovers much of the lost performance, suggesting that language can affect different stages of the decision process. These results show that skill discrepancies are a measurable major roadblock in the development of truly multilingual models. Better understanding these discrepancies can help us design models that perform more equitably across languages.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

CommonLID: Re-evaluating State-of-the-Art Language Identification Performance on Web Data

Language identification (LID) is a fundamental step in curating multilingual corpora. However, LID models still perform poorly for many languages, especially on the noisy and heterogeneous web data often used to train multilingual language models. In this paper, we introduce CommonLID, a community-driven, human-annotated LID benchmark for the web domain, covering 109 languages. Many of the included languages have been previously under-served, making CommonLID a key resource for developing more representative high-quality text corpora. We show CommonLID's value by using it, alongside five other common evaluation sets, to test eight popular LID models. We analyse our results to situate our contribution and to provide an overview of the state of the art. In particular, we highlight that existing evaluations overestimate LID accuracy for many languages in the web domain. We make CommonLID and the code used to create it available under an open, permissive license.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Position: Don't Just "Fix it in Post": A Science of AI Must Study Training Dynamics

What would it mean to have a scientific understanding of AI? Models are not static objects: they are snapshots of time-evolving processes shaped by data, objectives, architectures, and optimization dynamics. Yet much of AI research treats models as fixed artifacts, analyzing behaviors after training rather than asking why they emerge. This position paper argues that a science of AI must move beyond post-hoc fixes and study the training dynamics that produce model behavior. Such a science should support progressively stronger forms of understanding: predicting outcomes from early training signals, intervening when trajectories go wrong, and ultimately designing training procedures that more reliably produce desired properties. Scaling laws have made prediction routine for loss; the challenge is extending this success to capabilities, biases, robustness, and safety-relevant behaviors. We articulate requirements for such theories grounded in the history and philosophy of science, examine progress in mechanistic interpretability, fairness, memorization, and simplicity bias, and identify concrete open problems.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Global PIQA: Evaluating Commonsense Reasoning Across 100+ Languages and Cultures

To date, there exist almost no culturally-specific evaluation benchmarks for large language models (LLMs) that cover a large number of languages and cultures. In this paper, we present Global PIQA, a participatory commonsense reasoning benchmark for over 100 languages, constructed by hand by over 350 researchers from over 65 countries around the world. The 141 language varieties in Global PIQA cover five continents, 19 language families, and 24 writing systems. In the non-parallel split of Global PIQA, over 50% of examples reference local foods, customs, traditions, or other culturally-specific elements. In the parallel split, we translate more "culturally agnostic" commonsense reasoning questions into 131 language varieties, for direct cross-lingual comparisons. In both splits, all examples have been verified by native speakers of the languages. We find that state-of-the-art LLMs perform well on Global PIQA in aggregate, but they exhibit weaker performance in lower-resource languages (e.g. up to a 68% accuracy gap between languages in the parallel split). Global PIQA highlights that in many languages and cultures, everyday knowledge remains an area for improvement in LLMs, alongside more widely-discussed capabilities such as complex reasoning and expert knowledge. Beyond its uses for LLM evaluation, Global PIQA provides a glimpse into the wide diversity of cultures in which human language is embedded.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Goldfish: Monolingual Language Models for 350 Languages

For many low-resource languages, the only available language models are large multilingual models trained on many languages simultaneously. Despite state-of-the-art performance on reasoning tasks, we find that these models still struggle with basic grammatical text generation in many languages. First, large multilingual models perform worse than bigrams for many languages (e.g. 24% of languages in XGLM 4.5B; 43% in BLOOM 7.1B) using FLORES perplexity as an evaluation metric. Second, when we train small monolingual models with only 125M parameters on 1GB or less data for 350 languages, these small models outperform large multilingual models both in perplexity and on a massively multilingual grammaticality benchmark. To facilitate future work on low-resource language modeling, we release Goldfish, a suite of over 1,000 small monolingual language models trained comparably for 350 languages. These models represent the first publicly-available monolingual language models for 215 of the languages included.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

How Open Must Language Models be to Enable Reliable Scientific Inference?

How does the extent to which a model is open or closed impact the scientific inferences that can be drawn from research that involves it? In this paper, we analyze how restrictions on information about model construction and deployment threaten reliable inference. We argue that current closed models are generally ill-suited for scientific purposes, with some notable exceptions, and discuss ways in which the issues they present to reliable inference can be resolved or mitigated. We recommend that when models are used in research, potential threats to inference should be systematically identified along with the steps taken to mitigate them, and that specific justifications for model selection should be provided.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Soohak: A Mathematician-Curated Benchmark for Evaluating Research-level Math Capabilities of LLMs

Following the recent achievement of gold-medal performance on the IMO by frontier LLMs, the community is searching for the next meaningful and challenging target for measuring LLM reasoning. Whereas olympiad-style problems measure step-by-step reasoning alone, research-level problems use such reasoning to advance the frontier of mathematical knowledge itself, emerging as a compelling alternative. Yet research-level math benchmarks remain scarce because such problems are difficult to source (e.g., Riemann Bench and FrontierMath-Tier 4 contain 25 and 50 problems, respectively). To support reliable evaluation of next-generation frontier models, we introduce Soohak, a 439-problem benchmark newly authored from scratch by 64 mathematicians. Soohak comprises two subsets. On the Challenge subset, frontier models including Gemini-3-Pro, GPT-5, and Claude-Opus-4.5 reach 30.4%, 26.4%, and 10.4% respectively, leaving substantial headroom, while leading open-weight models such as Qwen3-235B, GPT-OSS-120B, and Kimi-2.5 remain below 15%. Notably, beyond standard problem solving, Soohak introduces a refusal subset that probes a capability intrinsic to research mathematics: recognizing ill-posed problems and pausing rather than producing confident but unjustified answers. On this subset, no model exceeds 50%, identifying refusal as a new optimization target that current models do not directly address. To prevent contamination, the dataset will be publicly released in late 2026, with model evaluations available upon request in the interim.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Common Corpus: The Largest Collection of Ethical Data for LLM Pre-Training

Large Language Models (LLMs) are pre-trained on large amounts of data from different sources and domains. Such datasets often contain trillions of tokens, including large portions of copyrighted or proprietary content, which raises questions about the legal use of such models. This underscores the need for truly open pre-training data that complies with data security regulations. In this paper, we introduce Common Corpus, the largest open dataset for LLM pre-training. The data assembled in Common Corpus are either uncopyrighted or under open licenses, totaling about two trillion tokens. The dataset contains a wide variety of languages, ranging from the high-resource European languages to some low-resource languages rarely represented in pre-training datasets. In addition, it includes a large amount of code data. The diversity of data sources in terms of covered domains and time periods opens up the paths for both research and entrepreneurial needs across diverse areas of knowledge. In this paper, we present the detailed provenance of data assembling and the details of dataset filtering and curation. We train two small language models on Common Corpus and find that they perform comparably to other models of their size, indicating that our dataset is suitable for multilingual pretraining. Common Corpus represents a key contribution to the ecosystem for open science research on Large Language Models.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Weight Tying Biases Token Embeddings Towards the Output Space

Weight tying, i.e. sharing parameters between input and output embedding matrices, is common practice in language model design, yet its impact on the learned embedding space remains poorly understood. In this paper, we show that tied embedding matrices align more closely with output (unembedding) matrices than with input embeddings of comparable untied models, indicating that the shared matrix is shaped primarily for output prediction rather than input representation. This unembedding bias arises because output gradients dominate early in training. Using tuned lens analysis, we show this negatively affects early-layer computations, which contribute less effectively to the residual stream. Scaling input gradients during training reduces this bias, providing causal evidence for the role of gradient imbalance. This is mechanistic evidence that weight tying optimizes the embedding matrix for output prediction, compromising its role in input representation. These results help explain why weight tying can harm performance at scale and have implications for training smaller LLMs, where the embedding matrix contributes substantially to total parameter count.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Disaggregation Reveals Hidden Training Dynamics: The Case of Agreement Attraction

Language models generally produce grammatical text, but they are more likely to make errors in certain contexts. Drawing on paradigms from psycholinguistics, we carry out a fine-grained analysis of those errors in different syntactic contexts. We demonstrate that by disaggregating over the conditions of carefully constructed datasets and comparing model performance on each over the course of training, it is possible to better understand the intermediate stages of grammatical learning in language models. Specifically, we identify distinct phases of training where language model behavior aligns with specific heuristics such as word frequency and local context rather than generalized grammatical rules. We argue that taking this approach to analyzing language model behavior more generally can serve as a powerful tool for understanding the intermediate learning phases, overall training dynamics, and the specific generalizations learned by language models.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Explaining and Mitigating Crosslingual Tokenizer Inequities

The number of tokens it takes to encode parallel text in different languages is known to vary. These disparities are called token premiums. Having high token premiums leads to less throughput during training and increases costs at inference. In this paper, we show that even after controlling for dataset size, vocabulary size, and data content, monolingual tokenizers exhibit a wide range of token premiums across languages. To understand the cross-linguistic differences that cause these token premiums, we train a suite of approximately 7,000 comparable monolingual tokenizers for 97 languages, manipulating tokenization algorithm, vocabulary size, and dataset size. We measure token premiums and test for a relationship between factors such as data similarity (between tokenizer training and evaluation), vocabulary size, and pre-tokenization. We also investigate the role of language-specific features such as writing system and word length. We find that similarity between training and test data does not impact token premiums, but vocabulary size and pre-tokenization do. While simply increasing vocabulary size does not lead to reduced token premium effects, we can determine an ``optimal'' vocabulary size for each language to achieve significantly reduced token premium effects. We also train superword tokenizers which allow merges over whitespaces, and we find that they both reduce token premium effects and improve compression overall. Thus, intervening on the vocabulary size or the pre-tokenizer significantly reduces crosslingual token premium effects.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Evaluating Morphological Alignment of Tokenizers in 70 Languages

While tokenization is a key step in language modeling, with effects on model training and performance, it remains unclear how to effectively evaluate tokenizer quality. One proposed dimension of tokenizer quality is the extent to which tokenizers preserve linguistically meaningful subwords, aligning token boundaries with morphological boundaries within a word. We expand MorphScore (Arnett & Bergen, 2025), which previously covered 22 languages, to support a total of 70 languages. The updated MorphScore offers more flexibility in evaluation and addresses some of the limitations of the original version. We then correlate our alignment scores with downstream task performance for five pre-trained languages models on seven tasks, with at least one task in each of the languages in our sample. We find that morphological alignment does not explain very much variance in model performance, suggesting that morphological alignment alone does not measure dimensions of tokenization quality relevant to model performance.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

On the Acquisition of Shared Grammatical Representations in Bilingual Language Models

Crosslingual transfer is crucial to contemporary language models' multilingual capabilities, but how it occurs is not well understood. We ask what happens to a monolingual language model when it begins to be trained on a second language. Specifically, we train small bilingual models for which we control the amount of data for each language and the order of language exposure. To find evidence of shared multilingual representations, we turn to structural priming, a method used to study grammatical representations in humans. We first replicate previous crosslingual structural priming results and find that after controlling for training data quantity and language exposure, there are asymmetrical effects across language pairs and directions. We argue that this asymmetry may shape hypotheses about human structural priming effects. We also find that structural priming effects are less robust for less similar language pairs, highlighting potential limitations of crosslingual transfer learning and shared representations for typologically diverse languages.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

BPE Stays on SCRIPT: Structured Encoding for Robust Multilingual Pretokenization

Byte Pair Encoding (BPE) tokenizers, widely used in Large Language Models, face challenges in multilingual settings, including penalization of non-Western scripts and the creation of tokens with partial UTF-8 sequences. Pretokenization, often reliant on complex regular expressions, can also introduce fragility and unexpected edge cases. We propose SCRIPT (Script Category Representation in PreTokenization), a novel encoding scheme that bypasses UTF-8 byte conversion by using initial tokens based on Unicode script and category properties. This approach enables a simple, rule-based pretokenization strategy that respects script boundaries, offering a robust alternative to pretokenization strategies based on regular expressions. We also introduce and validate a constrained BPE merging strategy that enforces character integrity, applicable to both SCRIPT-BPE and byte-based BPE. Our experiments demonstrate that SCRIPT-BPE achieves competitive compression while eliminating encoding-based penalties for non-Latin-script languages.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Why do language models perform worse for morphologically complex languages?

Language models perform differently across languages. It has been previously suggested that morphological typology may explain some of this variability (Cotterell et al., 2018). We replicate previous analyses and find additional new evidence for a performance gap between agglutinative and fusional languages, where fusional languages, such as English, tend to have better language modeling performance than morphologically more complex languages like Turkish. We then propose and test three possible causes for this performance gap: morphological alignment of tokenizers, tokenization quality, and disparities in dataset sizes and measurement. To test the morphological alignment hypothesis, we present MorphScore, a tokenizer evaluation metric, and supporting datasets for 22 languages. We find some evidence that tokenization quality explains the performance gap, but none for the role of morphological alignment. Instead we find that the performance gap is most reduced when training datasets are of equivalent size across language types, but only when scaled according to the so-called "byte-premium" -- the different encoding efficiencies of different languages and orthographies. These results suggest that no language is harder or easier for a language model to learn on the basis of its morphological typology. Differences in performance can be attributed to disparities in dataset size. These results bear on ongoing efforts to improve performance for low-performing and under-resourced languages.

cs.CL↗