Mikel Zubillaga

Ekhi Azurmendi, Joseba Fernandez de Landa, Jaione Bengoetxea et al.

Language models depend on massive text corpora that are often filtered for quality, a process that can unintentionally exclude non-standard linguistic varieties, reduce model robustness and reinforce representational biases. In this paper, we argue that language models should aim to capture the full spectrum of language variation (dialectal, historical, informal, etc.) rather than relying solely on standardized text. Focusing on Basque, a morphologically rich and low-resource language, we construct new corpora combining standard, social media, and historical sources, and pre-train the BERnaT family of encoder-only models in three configurations: standard, diverse, and combined. We further propose an evaluation framework that separates Natural Language Understanding (NLU) tasks into standard and diverse subsets to assess linguistic generalization. Results show that models trained on both standard and diverse data consistently outperform those trained on standard corpora, improving performance across all task types without compromising standard benchmark accuracy. These findings highlight the importance of linguistic diversity in building inclusive, generalizable language models.

Jaione Bengoetxea, Mikel Zubillaga, Ekhi Azurmendi et al.

In this paper we present our submission for the NorSID Shared Task as part of the 2025 VarDial Workshop (Scherrer et al., 2025), consisting of three tasks: Intent Detection, Slot Filling and Dialect Identification, evaluated using data in different dialects of the Norwegian language. For Intent Detection and Slot Filling, we have fine-tuned a multitask model in a cross-lingual setting, to leverage the xSID dataset available in 17 languages. In the case of Dialect Identification, our final submission consists of a model fine-tuned on the provided development set, which has obtained the highest scores within our experiments. Our final results on the test set show that our models do not drop in performance compared to the development set, likely due to the domain-specificity of the dataset and the similar distribution of both subsets. Finally, we also report an in-depth analysis of the provided datasets and their artifacts, as well as other sets of experiments that have been carried out but did not yield the best results. Additionally, we present an analysis on the reasons why some methods have been more successful than others; mainly the impact of the combination of languages and domain-specificity of the training data on the results.