Yana Veitsman

Yana Veitsman, Yihong Liu, Hinrich Schütze

Better cross-lingual alignment is often assumed to yield better cross-lingual transfer. However, explicit alignment techniques -- despite increasing embedding similarity -- frequently fail to improve token-level downstream performance. In this work, we show that this mismatch arises because alignment and downstream task objectives are largely orthogonal, and because the downstream benefits from alignment vary substantially across languages and task types. We analyze four XLM-R encoder models aligned on different language pairs and fine-tuned for either POS Tagging or Sentence Classification. Using representational analyses, including embedding distances, gradient similarities, and gradient magnitudes for both task and alignment losses, we find that: (1) embedding distances alone are unreliable predictors of improvements (or degradations) in task performance and (2) alignment and task gradients are often close to orthogonal, indicating that optimizing one objective may contribute little to optimizing the other. Taken together, our findings explain why ``better'' alignment often fails to translate into ``better'' cross-lingual transfer. Based on these insights, we provide practical guidelines for combining cross-lingual alignment with task-specific fine-tuning, highlighting the importance of careful loss selection.

Yana Veitsman, Mareike Hartmann

Research in NLP for Central Asian Turkic languages - Kazakh, Uzbek, Kyrgyz, and Turkmen - faces typical low-resource language challenges like data scarcity, limited linguistic resources and technology development. However, recent advancements have included the collection of language-specific datasets and the development of models for downstream tasks. Thus, this paper aims to summarize recent progress and identify future research directions. It provides a high-level overview of each language's linguistic features, the current technology landscape, the application of transfer learning from higher-resource languages, and the availability of labeled and unlabeled data. By outlining the current state, we hope to inspire and facilitate future research.

Aleksandra Bakalova, Yana Veitsman, Xinting Huang et al.

In-Context Learning (ICL) is an intriguing ability of large language models (LLMs). Despite a substantial amount of work on its behavioral aspects and how it emerges in miniature setups, it remains unclear which mechanism assembles task information from the individual examples in a fewshot prompt. We use causal interventions to identify information flow in Gemma-2 2B for five naturalistic ICL tasks. We find that the model infers task information using a two-step strategy we call contextualize-then-aggregate: In the lower layers, the model builds up representations of individual fewshot examples, which are contextualized by preceding examples through connections between fewshot input and output tokens across the sequence. In the higher layers, these representations are aggregated to identify the task and prepare prediction of the next output. The importance of the contextualization step differs between tasks, and it may become more important in the presence of ambiguous examples. Overall, by providing rigorous causal analysis, our results shed light on the mechanisms through which ICL happens in language models.

Mayank Jobanputra, Yana Veitsman, Yash Sarrof et al.

Transformers have theoretical limitations in modeling certain sequence-to-sequence tasks, yet it remains largely unclear if these limitations play a role in large-scale pretrained LLMs, or whether LLMs might effectively overcome these constraints in practice due to the scale of both the models themselves and their pretraining data. We explore how these architectural constraints manifest after pretraining, by studying a family of $\textit{retrieval}$ and $\textit{copying}$ tasks inspired by Liu et al. [2024a]. We use a recently proposed framework for studying length generalization [Huang et al., 2025] to provide guarantees for each of our settings. Empirically, we observe an $\textit{induction-versus-anti-induction}$ asymmetry, where pretrained models are better at retrieving tokens to the right (induction) rather than the left (anti-induction) of a query token. This asymmetry disappears upon targeted fine-tuning if length-generalization is guaranteed by theory. Mechanistic analysis reveals that this asymmetry is connected to the differences in the strength of induction versus anti-induction circuits within pretrained transformers. We validate our findings through practical experiments on real-world tasks demonstrating reliability risks. Our results highlight that pretraining selectively enhances certain transformer capabilities, but does not overcome fundamental length-generalization limits.