Budget-Xfer: Budget-Constrained Source Language Selection for Cross-Lingual Transfer to African Languages

Every text classifier for an African language begins with a budgeting question: how many labelled examples are needed, and can labels from other African languages stand in for them? We answer both questions empirically for 28 language-task pairs, news topic classification in 16 languages (MasakhaNEWS) and tweet sentiment in 12 languages (AfriSenti), using a character n-gram linear model that trains in seconds on two CPU cores with no pretrained weights and no accelerator. Monolingual learning curves at budgets from 25 to several thousand labels show that topic classification reaches 90% of its full-data macro-F1 with about 400 labels in the median language, while sentiment is still improving at the full training size in 11 of 12 languages and needs thousands of labels. Pooling the full training data of the other languages in the benchmark is worth a great deal at small budgets and nothing at large ones: at 25 target labels it adds 0.20 macro-F1 on average for news (up to 0.43 for Lingala) and 0.08 for sentiment, the gain decays to zero by 800 labels, and at full size pooling hurts in 9 of 16 and 8 of 12 languages. Twenty-five target labels plus pooled data match what 100 to 400 monolingual labels achieve for most news languages. A complete zero-shot transfer matrix shows that transfer without any target labels recovers a median of only 13% (news) and 4% (sentiment) of the gap between a majority-class predictor and the in-language model, with the exceptions explained by shared script (Amharic and Tigrinya), shared lexicon (English and Nigerian Pidgin, the Arabic dialects), or a shared label prior rather than by language family. We release code that regenerates every number from the public benchmark files and translate the results into concrete annotation guidance for teams building African-language classifiers without GPUs.

Cross-lingual transfer has become a central paradigm for extending natural language processing (NLP) technologies to low-resource languages. By leveraging supervision from high-resource languages, multilingual language models can achieve strong task performance with little or no labeled target-language data. However, it remains unclear to what extent cross-lingual transfer can substitute for language-specific efforts. In this paper, we synthesize prior research findings and data collection results on Luxembourgish, which, despite its typological proximity to high-resource languages and its presence in a multilingual context, remains insufficiently represented in modern NLP technologies. Across findings, we observe a fundamental interdependence between cross-lingual transfer and language-specific efforts. Cross-lingual transfer can substantially improve target-language performance, but its success depends critically on the availability of sufficiently high-quality, task-aligned target-language data. At the same time, such resources, particularly in low-resource settings, are typically too limited in scale to drive strong performance on their own. Instead, such resources reach their full potential only when leveraged within a cross-lingual framework. We therefore argue that cross-lingual transfer and language-specific efforts should not be viewed as competing alternatives. Instead, they function as complementary components of a sustainable low-resource NLP pipeline. Based on these insights, we provide practical guidelines for integrating and balancing cross-lingual transfer with language-specific development in sustainable low-resource NLP pipelines.

Cross-lingual zero-shot transfer and multilingual fine-tuning are promising approaches for NLP tasks such as Named Entity Recognition (NER) in low-resource languages, but in the absence of target language benchmarks, it is unclear which auxiliary language selection strategy leads to the best transfer. We introduce RunyaNER, the first publicly available NER benchmark for the East African language Runyankore, and use it to investigate the choice of which languages to use for transfer. Created with a semi-automated pipeline and fully manually verified, RunyaNER contains over 237k annotated words across 30k sentences. We benchmark pretrained models on RunyaNER, establishing that our dataset is of sufficient quality and size to produce effective Runyankore NER models. We then use RunyaNER to investigate auxiliary language selection in cross-lingual zero-shot and multilingual fine-tuning settings. Our experiments show that while transfer performance is highly sensitive to auxiliary language selection, embedding-based measures computed from labelled training spans correlate more strongly with downstream transfer performance than traditional linguistic features based on metadata or typology. By releasing RunyaNER and providing a systematic analysis of auxiliary language selection strategies, this work contributes both a new benchmark resource and practical insights for multilingual transfer in low-resource settings.