RILEC: Detection and Generation of L1 Russian Interference Errors in English Learner Texts

Large language models (LLMs) are used globally, and because much of their training data is in English, they typically perform best on English inputs. As a result, many non-native English speakers interact with them in English as a second language (ESL), and these inputs often contain typographical errors. Prior work has largely studied the effects of ESL variation and typographical errors separately, even though they often co-occur in real-world use. In this study, we use the Trans-EnV framework to transform standard English inputs into eight ESL variants and apply MulTypo to inject typos at three levels: low, moderate, and severe. We find that combining ESL variation and typos generally leads to larger performance drops than either factor alone, though the combined effect is not simply additive. This pattern is clearest on closed-ended tasks, where performance degradation can be characterized more consistently across ESL variants and typo levels, while results on open-ended tasks are more mixed. Overall, these findings suggest that evaluations on clean standard English may overestimate real-world model performance, and that evaluating ESL variation and typographical errors in isolation does not fully capture model behavior in realistic settings.

Grammatical error correction using large language models often suffers from the over-correction issue. To mitigate this, we propose a training-free inference method that performs edit-level majority voting over multiple candidates generated by a single model, without requiring model modifications or additional training. Across nine benchmarks covering English, Czech, German, Ukrainian, Korean, Hindi, and Romanian, the proposed method outperforms both greedy and MBR decoding in most cases. Moreover, it yields stable correction quality regardless of the instruction prompts used. We release two repository supporting GEC datasets loading and LLM inference.

Existing social bias benchmarks evaluate large language models mostly on fluent, well-formed English, reflecting native speaker usage and leaving non-native writers unrepresented. To address this gap, we investigate how grammatical errors by non-native writers affect social bias. We develop a controlled framework that injects common learner errors into prompts and apply it to three bias benchmarks covering stereotype alignment and demographic preference across gender, race, and religion. We find that grammatical errors increase bias, and the effect grows with the error rate. Among the four common error types we consider, preposition errors produce the largest and most consistent increase in stereotype alignment. Our analysis suggests that errors increase bias when they are more likely to interfere with comprehension. Finally, fine-tuning on erroneous texts reduces the bias increase caused by grammatical errors. Our findings show that bias evaluations based exclusively on well-formed prompts may underestimate the bias experienced by users whose English contains grammatical errors.