cs.CLSep 3, 2026

Contextual Tamil Spelling and Grammar Correction Using Progressively Fine-Tuned Sequence-to-Sequence Transformers

Authors: Karthikeyan AJaya Nirmala SSangeetha SivanesanIndhu RPranav KumarBharat Jude JohnsonVishnu Ram

Abstract

Tamil spell and grammar correction is challenging because Tamil is an agglutinative low-resource language with rich verbal morphology, complex sandhi (phonetic transformation) rules at word boundaries, and a script of 247 distinct letters. Prior work targets word-level surface errors with rule-based methods, statistical n-gram models, Minimum Edit Distance, or hybrid pipelines with a transformer re-ranker; such methods cannot reliably handle contextual errors - subject-verb agreement, tense consistency, or cross-word sandhi - which require sentence-level understanding. We propose an end-to-end sequence-to-sequence formulation and fine-tune mT5-small and mBART-50 on a synthetic corpus of up to 657,720 noisy-clean Tamil sentence pairs spanning ten error categories. Both backbones follow the same four-stage progressive schedule, each stage targeting one weakness: surface noise (v2), contextual grammar (v3), single-site sandhi (v4), and multi-site cross-word sandhi (v5). On a 1,000-sentence balanced diagnostic set verified disjoint from all training data, our best model, mBART-50 v5, reaches 69.3% top-1 exact-match accuracy, with 87.5% on sandhi and 43.5% on subject-verb agreement. The schedule is what produces these gains: subject-verb accuracy rises from 1.0% to 52.5% once contextual pairs are introduced, and sandhi from 0% to 87.5% once multi-site sandhi pairs are. We additionally quantify a precision-recall trade-off this literature has not reported: sandhi recall is paid for monotonically in identity accuracy. Finally, Tamil-LLaMA-7B-Instruct reaches 19.0% zero-shot and 24.7% with three demonstrations against a 20.0% copy baseline, showing that a Tamil-adapted instruction model does not transfer to specialised sentence-level correction without task-specific supervision.

Explore similar work

Aug 2, 2026cs.CL

Morphology Aware Reversible Semantic Tokenization and Hierarchical Word Composition for Tamil Language Models

Statistical subword tokenizers can process arbitrary text, but their units need not align with lexical or grammatical structure. This is especially important for Tamil, where a written word may encode stem changes, case, number, tense, agreement, voice, clitics, and linked verbs. We present a Tamil morphology system extending the open-source ThamizhiMorph analyzer and generator, together with a byte-exact semantic tokenizer and a learned hierarchical word composer. Twelve finite-state transducers analyze words into lemmas and grammatical features, while character and byte fallbacks preserve exact reconstruction. We compare a flat morphology tokenizer, a signal-preserving word composer, and tokenizers based on Sarvam-1, AI4Bharat IndicBERTv2, and BrahmicTokenizer-131K. All systems use the same 69,591 Tamil-English training pairs, 18.97-million-parameter encoder-decoder, 40,000 updates, target tokenizer, optimizer, positional method, and generation settings. On a protected 3,539-row IN22 and FLORES+ evaluation, morphology-flat achieves the best pooled scores: 10.63 BLEU, 35.26 chrF++, and 0.6276 COMETKiwi. Relative to AI4Bharat, the strongest external-tokenizer baseline, these are improvements of 7.2%, 3.2%, and 2.6%. The word composer scores 10.30, 34.88, and 0.6241, improving on AI4Bharat by 3.8%, 2.1%, and 2.0%. The composer reduces mean global source states from 71.48 to 29.08, a 59.3% reduction, and is estimated to require 9-21% fewer inference FLOPs depending on decoder caching. Its remaining quality gap is concentrated in longer FLORES+ sentences. These results show that explicit Tamil morphology improves translation under a fixed small-model budget, while hierarchical composition substantially reduces sequence length and estimated inference cost.
Anand Murugan
May 13, 2026cs.CL

Edit-level Majority Voting Mitigates Over-Correction in LLM-based Grammatical Error Correction

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.
Takumi Goto, Yusuke Sakai, Taro Watanabe
Apr 26, 2026cs.CL

Neural Grammatical Error Correction for Romanian

Resources for Grammatical Error Correction (GEC) in non-English languages are scarce, while available spellcheckers in these languages are mostly limited to simple corrections and rules. In this paper we introduce a first GEC corpus for Romanian consisting of 10k pairs of sentences. In addition, the German version of ERRANT (ERRor ANnotation Toolkit) scorer was adapted for Romanian to analyze this corpus and extract edits needed for evaluation. Multiple neural models were experimented, together with pretraining strategies, which proved effective for GEC in low-resource settings. Our baseline consists of a small Transformer model trained only on the GEC dataset (F0.5 of 44.38), whereas the best performing model is produced by pretraining a larger Transformer model on artificially generated data, followed by finetuning on the actual corpus (F0.5 of 53.76). The proposed method for generating additional training examples is easily extensible and can be applied to any language, as it requires only a POS tagger
Teodor-Mihai Cotet, Stefan Ruseti, Mihai Dascalu