CLMay 28

Evaluating Cross-lingual Knowledge Consistency in Code-Mixed vis-a-vis Indian Languages using IndicKLAR

arXiv:2605.2963757.5
AI Analysis

For NLP researchers working on multilingual models, this work provides a benchmark and insights into the cross-lingual consistency gap for Indian languages, though it is an incremental extension of existing benchmarks.

The paper introduces IndicKLAR, a benchmark for evaluating cross-lingual knowledge consistency in Indian languages and code-mixed variants. It finds that native-language accuracy lags behind English by ~0.50, but code-mixed inputs close the gap to within ~0.05 of English without model intervention, and identifies a consistent flip point between incorrect and correct predictions.

Large language models recall knowledge reliably in English but often fail on the same query posed in a lower-resourced language -- a crosslingual consistency gap that remains underexplored for Indian languages and their code-mixed counterparts. To study this gap, we introduce IndiKLAR, an Indic extension of the KLAR-CLC benchmark covering 18 of the 22 scheduled Indian languages and pairing them with code-mixed variants for 11 widely used language pairs, with native-speaker verification of both monolingual and code-mixed variants for these 11 settings. This three-way alignment offers a unique opportunity to examine how knowledge recall consistency varies across the spectrum of English, code-mixed, and native Indian language inputs. Evaluating across nine open-weight models, we find that the native-language accuracy gap to English can reach $\sim$0.50, while code-mixed inputs close most of it -- bringing performance within $\sim$0.05 of English without any model-level intervention. Motivated by this, we evaluate several prompting strategies that vary in how language conversion is exposed, including a two-stage translate-then-answer setup, a one-stage joint translation-and-answer prompt, and Translate-in-Thought (TinT) -- a single-step strategy in which the model converts the input internally and emits only the final answer. Across the performance trajectory native $\rightarrow$ code-mixed $\rightarrow$ English, we identify a consistent flip point -- the boundary between incorrect and correct prediction -- that lies between the native and code-mixed settings. Interestingly, this holds whether the trajectory is induced by the input surface form or by the model's internal conversion process.

Foundations

The foundational work for this paper's niche, ranked by how specifically the neighbourhood builds on it — not by global fame.

Your Notes