Choosing the Right Language Mode at Inference Time for Multilingual Reliability

Reasoning language models (RLMs) achieve strong performance on complex reasoning tasks, but still exhibit substantial multilingual reasoning gaps, largely due to language-understanding failures when interpreting non-English inputs. Translation into English can mitigate these failures by expressing non-English inputs in a form that RLMs can more reliably interpret, yet translating every input incurs unnecessary inference cost when the model can reason reliably from the original query. To address this challenge, we propose Luar, a Language Understanding Boundary-aware Reinforcement Learning framework that trains RLMs to selectively invoke translation when their direct understanding is unreliable. Luar trains the model to either solve the original input directly or reason over its English translation, encouraging translation only when translator-augmented reasoning is expected to substantially outperform direct reasoning. Across multilingual reasoning benchmarks, Luar outperforms training-based baselines, with particularly large gains on low-resource languages. On Qwen3-4B, it improves average accuracy by 8.4 percentage points over standard GRPO. Further analysis shows that Luar concentrates translator calls on queries where translation benefits reasoning, helping to reduce inference cost. The project will be made publicly available at https://github.com/deokhk/LUAR.

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) faithfulness matters for monitoring, explaining and safely deploying large language models, yet it has been studied mostly in English. Languages differ in level, the amount of text available to learn from, so models know less in lower-resource languages, which may change how much they rely on their reasoning. To our knowledge, we are the first to relate CoT faithfulness to both resource level and task type (knowledge- or reasoning-intensive). On parallel multiple-choice questions from Multilingual Massive Multitask Language Understanding (MMMLU) in eight languages, faithfulness rises as resource level falls on knowledge-intensive tasks but not on reasoning-intensive ones, a gap that points the same way across four models and several faithfulness measures. We propose, and find support for, the Reliance Hypothesis: models rely more on their reasoning when they cannot recall the answer, as in lower-resource languages on knowledge-intensive tasks. Model confidence partly explains the effect of resource level, but not the knowledge-reasoning gap. Languages in which models are less confident rely more on reasoning, yet less confident answers within a language do not, a Simpson's paradox. In lower-resource languages, models rely on their reasoning for more answers, not more strongly for each. CoT monitoring may therefore be most informative in lower-resource languages, where it is least often validated.

Despite advances in multilingual capabilities, most large language models (LLMs) remain English-centric in their training and, crucially, in the reasoning traces they produce: even for non-English problems, they predominantly reason in English, leaving non-English users with intermediate reasoning they cannot follow. We address this disparity with two contributions. (a) We introduce $\texttt{ReasonXL}$, the first large-scale parallel corpus of cross-domain reasoning traces in five European languages (English, German, French, Italian, and Spanish): over 2.5M aligned samples (11B tokens) per language, each comprising prompt, reasoning trace, and final output, enabling direct supervision of language-specific reasoning. (b) Using $\texttt{ReasonXL}$, we demonstrate that LLMs can be adapted to reason entirely in a target language through a simple two-stage pipeline of supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR), matching or exceeding the base models' English-reasoning performance in two of four languages and recovering most of it in the remaining two.