Venkata Naga Sai Vishnu Rohit Pulipaka

arXiv2026

Evaluating Dedicated Monolingual and Joint Multilingual Causal Models for Dravidian Languages

Dravidian languages, mainly Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, and Malayalam make up only a small part of the data used to train multilingual language models, so it's not clear how much per-language ability these models actually keep. I have trained five GPT-2 architecture models from scratch to compare four monolingual models (one each for Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, and Malayalam, each with its own 32K-vocabulary subword tokenizer) against one multilingual model sharing a 64K-vocabulary subword tokenizer across all four languages. All the 5 models are trained on cleaned CC-100, Wikipedia, and Samanantar data. I have tested the models on perplexity, bits-per-byte, tokenizer efficiency, and fine-tuning results which are compared against mGPT. The monolingual models outperform mGPT on sentiment classification and named entity recognition, and their tokenizers proved more efficient than the shared multilingual model across all the languages tested.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

How Fast Can Reward Models Score? A Systems Study of C++ and PyTorch Inference Runtimes for RLHF

In RLHF pipelines, reward scoring blocks policy updates. Slow scoring bottlenecks the entire loop, since no update runs until every rollout gets a score. And yet most setups just default to PyTorch eager mode or torch.compile, no one checks if that's actually fastest. Scoring itself is small. Rollout generation eats far more of a typical RLHF step. But scoring and generation fight over the same CPU and GPU resources, so a faster scoring engine doesn't shrink step time on its own. It mainly frees up capacity generation can use instead. We built a native C++ inference engine on ONNX Runtime. First step: confirm correctness. Output matched the PyTorch reference to 5.7 x 10^-6 on CPU and 4.2 x 10^-3 on GPU, close enough to trust. Then we tested it against PyTorch eager mode, torch.compile, and FastAPI, on both CPU and GPU. CPU was decisive. Our engine beat every baseline, confidence intervals didn't even overlap. GPU gave a different view: we beat PyTorch and FastAPI, but torch.compile came out ahead. Further testing traced the speedup to ONNX Runtime itself, not C++ as a language. And batching strategy mattered more than either the language or the runtime choice, more than we expected. The results are from repeated, independent runs, since single runs just aren't reliable enough to trust.

cs.LG↗