Quantifying the Impact of Translation Errors on Multilingual LLM Evaluation

Existing MT evaluation frameworks, including automatic metrics and human evaluation schemes such as Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM), are largely language-agnostic. However, they often fail to capture dialect- and culture-specific errors in diglossic languages (e.g., Arabic), where translation failures stem from mismatches in language variety, content coverage, and pragmatic appropriateness rather than surface form alone.We introduce LQM: Linguistically Motivated Multidimensional Quality Metrics for MT. LQM is a hierarchical error taxonomy for diagnosing MT errors through six linguistically grounded levels: sociolinguistics, pragmatics, semantics, morphosyntax, orthography, and graphetics (Figure 1). We construct a bidirectional parallel corpus of 3,850 sentences (550 per variety) spanning seven Arabic dialects (Egyptian, Emirati, Jordanian, Mauritanian, Moroccan, Palestinian, and Yemeni), derived from conversational, culturally rich content. We evaluate six LLMs in a zero-shot setting and conduct expert span-level human annotation using LQM, producing 6,113 labeled error spans across 3,495 unique erroneous sentences, along with severity-weighted quality scores. We complement this analysis with an automatic metric (spBLEU). Though validated here on Arabic, LQM is a language-agnostic framework designed to be easily applied to or adapted for other languages. LQM annotated errors data, prompts, and annotation guidelines are publicly available at https://github.com/UBC-NLP/LQM_MT.

Multilingual language models are deployed across a hundred or more languages, yet most benchmarks test whether a model can perform a task in a language rather than whether it commands the language itself, conflating fluency with proficiency. We introduce M-GATE (Multilingual Grammar, Accuracy in Translation, and Efficiency), a benchmark of linguistic proficiency spanning 30 typologically diverse languages from high- to low-resource. M-GATE comprises three tasks: grammatical error detection on linguist-crafted, adversarially selected sentences that turn on hard, language-specific phenomena; round-trip translation of shared English sources across 29 target languages, scored by a three-provider LLM judge panel validated against professional annotators; and a supplementary tokenizer-efficiency measure. We evaluate over 50 models in more than 80 configurations. Fluency and proficiency come apart sharply: models that translate competently sit near chance on the adversarial grammar items, the best reaching a Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) of only 0.36, and their errors lean systematically toward under-flagging, accepting ungrammatical text rather than raising false alarms. Translation quality closely tracks a language's share of pretraining data (r = 0.86 against log Common Crawl share), producing a steep low-resource penalty that is nonetheless narrowing with successive model releases. Enabling reasoning reliably improves translation, while its effect on error detection is smaller and for some models negative, so the best configuration is task-dependent. To resist contamination, test items are kept private behind a continuously updated public leaderboard, with illustrative examples released (https://m-gate.ai).

Most current large language models (LLMs) support a wide variety of languages in addition to English, including high-resource languages (e.g. German, Chinese, French), as well as low-resource ones (e.g. Swahili, Telugu). In addition, they have shown impressive capabilities in different domains, like coding, science and math. In this paper, taking math as an example domain, we study the performance of different LLMs across languages. Experimental results show that there exists a non-negligible and consistent gap in the performance of the models across languages. Interestingly, and somewhat against expectations, the gap exists for both high- and low-resource languages. These results should impact further research into cross-lingual capability generalization for next generation LLMs. Or they would, if it weren't for the fact that they are distorted by data quality issues. By analyzing one of the standard multilingual math benchmarks (MGSM), we determine that several translation errors are present in the data. Furthermore, the lack of standardized answer extraction from LLM outputs further influences the final results. We propose a method for semi-automatic quality assurance to address the first issue at scale, and give recommendations to address the second one. Combining these two approaches we show that the aforementioned language gap mostly disappears, leading to completely different conclusions from our research. We additionally release the corrected dataset to the community (https://github.com/google-research-datasets/MGSM-Rev2).