REVIEW 2 cited by
Translating Across Cultures: LLMs for Intralingual Cultural Adaptation
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
LLMs are increasingly being deployed for multilingual applications and have demonstrated impressive translation capabilities between several low and high-resource languages. An aspect of translation that often gets overlooked is that of cultural adaptation, or modifying source culture references to suit the target culture. While specialized translation models still outperform LLMs on the machine translation task when viewed from the lens of correctness, they are not sensitive to cultural differences often requiring manual correction. LLMs on the other hand have a rich reservoir of cultural knowledge embedded within its parameters that can be potentially exploited for such applications. In this paper, we define the task of cultural adaptation and create an evaluation framework to evaluate the performance of modern LLMs for cultural adaptation and analyze their cross-cultural knowledge while connecting related concepts across different cultures. We also analyze possible issues with automatic adaptation. We hope that this task will offer more insight into the cultural understanding of LLMs and their creativity in cross-cultural scenarios.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
XCR-Bench: Benchmarking Cross-Cultural Reasoning in LLMs via Culture-Specific Items and Hall's Triad
XCR-Bench provides 4,100+ parallel sentences with 1,098 culture-specific items mapped to Hall's Triad, and shows LLMs struggle most with deeper, semi-visible cultural norms.
-
PerCul: A Story-Driven Cultural Evaluation of LLMs in Persian
PerCul is a Persian cultural story-comprehension benchmark on which the best LLMs lag human performance by 11.3 to 21.3 percentage points.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.