Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Better to Ask in English: Evaluation of Large Language Models on English, Low-resource and Cross-Lingual Settings

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

arxiv 2410.13153 v1 pith:PZW42237 submitted 2024-10-17 cs.CL

Better to Ask in English: Evaluation of Large Language Models on English, Low-resource and Cross-Lingual Settings

classification cs.CL
keywords llmsenglishlanguagelow-resourcelanguagespromptssettingsacross
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) are trained on massive amounts of data, enabling their application across diverse domains and tasks. Despite their remarkable performance, most LLMs are developed and evaluated primarily in English. Recently, a few multi-lingual LLMs have emerged, but their performance in low-resource languages, especially the most spoken languages in South Asia, is less explored. To address this gap, in this study, we evaluate LLMs such as GPT-4, Llama 2, and Gemini to analyze their effectiveness in English compared to other low-resource languages from South Asia (e.g., Bangla, Hindi, and Urdu). Specifically, we utilized zero-shot prompting and five different prompt settings to extensively investigate the effectiveness of the LLMs in cross-lingual translated prompts. The findings of the study suggest that GPT-4 outperformed Llama 2 and Gemini in all five prompt settings and across all languages. Moreover, all three LLMs performed better for English language prompts than other low-resource language prompts. This study extensively investigates LLMs in low-resource language contexts to highlight the improvements required in LLMs and language-specific resources to develop more generally purposed NLP applications.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. MediQAl: A French Medical Question Answering Dataset for Knowledge and Reasoning Evaluation

    cs.CL 2025-07 accept novelty 8.0

    MediQAl is a new French medical QA benchmark with 32k exam-sourced questions in three formats and cognitive labels, evaluated on 14 LLMs to reveal gaps between factual recall and reasoning performance.

  2. The Language of Bargaining: Linguistic Effects in LLM Negotiations

    cs.AI 2026-01 conditional novelty 5.0

    Language labels shift LLM negotiation outcomes in three games, but the claimed dominance over model choice is inconsistent with the reported model-level gaps.