Supervised fine-tuning datasets remain overwhelmingly English-centric and commercially restricted, as their content is frequently generated by proprietary models whose terms of service forbid training competing systems. We introduce Multi-SFT, a commercially permissive collection of 502,818 instruction-response pairs across five European languages, built via translation and regeneration pipelines for tasks where translation is insufficient. Human evaluation yields inter-annotator agreement of at least 0.87 across all datasets and languages. Fine-tuning nine models from three different families (EuroLLM, OLMo 2, Qwen3; 1B-32B) and evaluating them on 13 benchmarks shows that Multi-SFT alone is competitive with larger augmented mixes and official instruction-tuned releases, with decisive advantages on safety tasks.
Figures & tables
Project
Multilingual
Dataset License
Data Provenance
Apertus
✓
✓
✗
EuroLLM
✓
~
✗
Nemotron
✗
✓
✓
OLMo
✗
✓
✗
Salamandra
✓
✗
✗
Multi-SFT
✓
✓
✓
Table 1: Comparison of SFT mixtures used in recent open LLM projects. ✓ denotes full compliance, ✗ denotes non-compliance, and ~ denotes partial compliance. Dataset License indicates whether all training data is released under permissive licenses. Data Provenance indicates whether synthetic data is generated exclusively with permissive or open-weight models, excluding proprietary sources such as GPT-4 or Gemini.
Dataset
Domain
Strategy
License
EN
DE
ES
FR
IT
Total
Multi-AdvBench
Safety
Regeneration
MIT
104
104
104
104
104
520
Multi-AyaRedteaming
Safety
Regeneration
Apache 2.0
812
835
330
754
913
3,644
multi-dialogues
Conversation
Regeneration
ODC-BY-1.0
-
12,001
11,999
12,000
12,001
48,001
multi-dolly-15k
General QA
Translation
CC BY-SA 3.0
6,004
2,250
2,251
2,252
2,222
14,979
Multi-FLAN
Reasoning
Translation
Apache 2.0
36,069
13,495
13,441
13,492
13,485
89,982
multi-mentorES
General QA
Translation
CC BY 4.0
-
2,541
2,552
2,534
2,548
10,175
Table 2: Overview of the multi- dataset collection. Source datasets and pipelines: AdvBench ( Zou et al., 2023 ) , Aya Red-teaming ( Ahmadian et al., 2024 ) , SODA ( Kim et al., 2023 ) , Dolly ( Conover et al., 2023 ) , FLAN ( Longpre et al., 2023 ) , Persona IF ( Lambert et al., 2024 ) , RAG Multilingual ( Projecte AINA, 2026 ) , SciRIFF ( Wadden et al., 2025 ) , SmolTalk ( Allal et al., 2025 ) , and Table-GPT ( Li et al., 2024 ) .
Dataset
DE
EN
ES
FR
IT
multi-dialogues
98
–
99
100
95
multi-dolly-15k
100
–
93
100
94
Multi-FLAN
90
–
87
84
88
multi-mentorES
95
–
–
96
93
Multi-PersonaIF
87
89
83
80
72
Multi-RAG-Multilingual
100
–
–
96
90
Table 3: Percentage of positively-rated entries by dataset and language. Values represent the average of the two independent annotators.
Dataset
DE
EN
ES
FR
IT
multi-dialogues
0.99
–
0.99
1
0.97
multi-dolly-15k
1
–
0.95
1
0.98
Multi-FLAN
0.90
–
0.97
0.93
0.93
multi-mentorES
0.99
–
–
0.96
0.98
Multi-PersonaIF
0.98
0.94
0.98
0.88
0.94
Multi-RAG-Multilingual
1
–
–
0.98
0.97
Table 4: Inter-annotator agreement (Gwet’s AC2) by dataset and language.
Multilingual
English
Family
Model
MARCO
FLORES
Belebele
XQuAD
M-ALERT
MMLU
ARC
XStory
Avg
XQuAD
DROP
IFE
MMLU
ARC
Avg
EuroLLM
1.7B ml
31.7
49.0
23.4
33.4
43.6
24.5
32.0
58.4
37.0
32.8
23.0
32.3
23.5
34.0
29.1
1.7B full
21.1
45.3
23.0
25.7
21.6
24.4
32.2
61.2
31.8
24.6
21.1
27.9
23.4
34.1
26.2
1.7B bl
27.1
52.2
25.9
42.6
29.0
24.5
32.1
58.6
36.5
42.5
25.2
39.9
24.3
37.5
33.9
1.7B sft †
16.5
59.1
25.4
25.0
44.4
26.3
33.3
60.8
36.4
37.1
25.1
20.3
26.7
37.4
29.3
9B ml
50.2
62.0
64.6
75.8
56.3
50.7
48.9
64.5
59.1
73.9
46.6
59.5
53.0
52.9
57.2
Table 5: Benchmark results divided between Multilingual (left) and English (right). ml : Multi-SFT ; full : extended mix; bl : baseline SFT; sft † : official provider model. Average performance is given per group (see Avg columns).
Appendix figures & tables2 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Field
Type
Description
messages
list[{role: str, content: str}]
Conversation turns in chat format. Roles are system , user , and assistant .
source_data
string
Identifier of the originating dataset or repository.
category
string
Task category: Chat , Instruction following , Reasoning , Code , Knowledge , or Safety .
language
string
Language code of the example (e.g., en , de , fr , it , es ).
token_count
int32
Number of tokens in the conversation, computed using the tokenizer of the target model.
strategy
string
Origin or transformation status of the example: original , translated , regenerated , or translated+regenerated .
Appendix
Table 6: Schema of the Multi-SFT dataset.
Instruction-following datasets
A
Correct and complete response fully satisfying the instruction.
B
Generally correct response with minor issues (e.g., slight inaccuracies, small omissions, or minor linguistic problems).
C
Response attempts to follow the instruction but contains major content or linguistic issues reducing training usefulness.
D
Irrelevant, off-topic, or otherwise unusable response.
Appendix
Table 7: Annotation schema used for instruction-following and conversational datasets.
Fine-tuning a large language model is a ubiquitous method for enhancing its capability on a specific downstream task. However, prior work has shown that this increase in capability comes with a cost: it can increase a model's tendency to respond to unsafe adversarial prompts, even when fine-tuning with non-adversarial data. We present the first comprehensive empirical study of this phenomenon in multilingual settings by fine-tuning Llama-3.2, Qwen3, and Gemma-3 models using benign data translated across nine languages. We find that safety outcomes are highly sensitive to both the choice of fine-tuning language and the evaluation language, with adversarial compliance rates increasing four-fold in some settings. Multilingual safety drift is decoupled from general capability metrics, and occurs heterogeneously across languages and models. Fine-tuning in non-English languages often induces smaller internal representational drifts than English, but these shifts lead models to default to either exaggerated compliance or refusal. As such, assessing fine-tuning impacts solely in English provides inadequate assurance for deployment. To facilitate further research into these cross-lingual safety blind spots, we release the Multilingual-Benign-Tune dataset and the SORRY-Bench-Multilingual evaluation suite.
Will Hawkins, Kaivalya Rawal, Jonathan Rystrøm +8
Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford · Hasso Plattner Institute, University of Potsdam · Chinese University of Hong Kong +2
Machine translation (MT) offers a scalable way to extend English instruction-tuning data to multiple languages, but it can distort task-critical constraints and required outputs, creating corrupted training examples and degrading models trained on such data. We introduce EuroAlpaca, a task-preserving localisation pipeline and near-parallel resource covering 50 European languages and regional varieties, together with European-IFEval, a multilingual benchmark for verifiable instruction following. Depending on the example, our pipeline applies field-wise MT while preserving task-critical content or reconstructs a task-equivalent target-language instance, followed by validation of cross-field coherence and target-language consistency. Across LoRA experiments with four LLMs, training on directly translated data improves ROUGE-L and F-BERT on the Aya Evaluation Suite, but reduces accuracy on European-IFEval by 29.8% relative to the unadapted baseline. In contrast, adaptation with EuroAlpaca improves accuracy by 12.9% over the same baseline, reversing the degradation caused by direct MT, while also achieving the highest ROUGE-L and F-BERT scores on Aya. These results show that preserving task semantics is essential for multilingual instruction tuning.
Aleix Sant, Jordi Luque, Carlos Escolano
Scientific Research, Telefónica Innovación Digital · Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Barcelona, Spain
Instruction following is a critical ability for Large Language Models to be used directly by humans. This often requires supervised fine-tuning on curated instruction datasets, sometimes complemented with an alignment step. However, in multilingual scenarios, obtaining high-quality data for these stages remains challenging, motivating the exploration of In-Context Learning (ICL) as a possible alternative. In this work, we study whether ICL can serve as a substitute for Instruction Tuning in multilingual language models, while also examining how the comparison changes with model scale. Our results indicate that a gap remains between ICL and Instruction Tuning, motivating further research to reduce it.
David Ponce, Thierry Etchegoyhen
Vicomtech Foundation, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA) · University of the Basque Country - EHU