Split Personality Training: Revealing Latent Knowledge Through Alternate Personalities

Detecting misalignment in large language models is challenging because models may learn to conceal misbehavior during training. Standard auditing techniques fall short: black-box methods often cannot distinguish misaligned outputs from benign ones, and mechanistic interpretability does not scale with model capabilities. We introduce Split Personality Training (SPT), which fine-tunes a second ``honest persona'' into LoRA parameters that remain inactive during normal operation. After the main model responds, we activate the LoRA adapter and insert a trigger string, enabling the honest persona to review the response while accessing the main model's latent states. We test our method on the Anthropic Auditing Game Model Organism, a benchmark where Llama-3.3-70B is trained to exploit reward hacks while concealing this behavior. SPT achieves 96% overall accuracy, whereas Anthropic reports near 0% accuracy. The honest persona reveals latent knowledge inaccessible to external observers, such as the fictional biases the compromised model was trained on.

AmharicStoryQA: A Multicultural Story Question Answering Benchmark in Amharic

With the growing emphasis on multilingual and cultural evaluation benchmarks for large language models, language and culture are often treated as synonymous, and performance is commonly used as a proxy for a models understanding of a given language. In this work, we argue that such evaluations overlook meaningful cultural variation that exists within a single language. We address this gap by focusing on narratives from different regions of Ethiopia and demonstrate that, despite shared linguistic characteristics, region-specific and domain-specific content substantially influences language evaluation outcomes. To this end, we introduce \textbf{\textit{AmharicStoryQA}}, a long-sequence story question answering benchmark grounded in culturally diverse narratives from Amharic-speaking regions. Using this benchmark, we reveal a significant narrative understanding gap in existing LLMs, highlight pronounced regional differences in evaluation results, and show that supervised fine-tuning yields uneven improvements across regions and evaluation settings. Our findings emphasize the need for culturally grounded benchmarks that go beyond language-level evaluation to more accurately assess and improve narrative understanding in low-resource languages.

PricingLogic: Evaluating LLMs Reasoning on Complex Tourism Pricing Tasks

We present PricingLogic, the first benchmark that probes whether Large Language Models(LLMs) can reliably automate tourism-related prices when multiple, overlapping fare rules apply. Travel agencies are eager to offload this error-prone task onto AI systems; however, deploying LLMs without verified reliability could result in significant financial losses and erode customer trust. PricingLogic comprises 300 natural-language questions based on booking requests derived from 42 real-world pricing policies, spanning two levels of difficulty: (i) basic customer-type pricing and (ii)bundled-tour calculations involving interacting discounts. Evaluations of a line of LLMs reveal a steep performance drop on the harder tier,exposing systematic failures in rule interpretation and arithmetic reasoning.These results highlight that, despite their general capabilities, today's LLMs remain unreliable in revenue-critical applications without further safeguards or domain adaptation. Our code and dataset are available at https://github.com/EIT-NLP/PricingLogic.

Accept or Deny? Evaluating LLM Fairness and Performance in Loan Approval across Table-to-Text Serialization Approaches

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly employed in high-stakes decision-making tasks, such as loan approvals. While their applications expand across domains, LLMs struggle to process tabular data, ensuring fairness and delivering reliable predictions. In this work, we assess the performance and fairness of LLMs on serialized loan approval datasets from three geographically distinct regions: Ghana, Germany, and the United States. Our evaluation focuses on the model's zero-shot and in-context learning (ICL) capabilities. Our results reveal that the choice of serialization (Serialization refers to the process of converting tabular data into text formats suitable for processing by LLMs.) format significantly affects both performance and fairness in LLMs, with certain formats such as GReat and LIFT yielding higher F1 scores but exacerbating fairness disparities. Notably, while ICL improved model performance by 4.9-59.6% relative to zero-shot baselines, its effect on fairness varied considerably across datasets. Our work underscores the importance of effective tabular data representation methods and fairness-aware models to improve the reliability of LLMs in financial decision-making.

Voice Conversion Improves Cross-Domain Robustness for Spoken Arabic Dialect Identification

Arabic dialect identification (ADI) systems are essential for large-scale data collection pipelines that enable the development of inclusive speech technologies for Arabic language varieties. However, the reliability of current ADI systems is limited by poor generalization to out-of-domain speech. In this paper, we present an effective approach based on voice conversion for training ADI models that achieves state-of-the-art performance and significantly improves robustness in cross-domain scenarios. Evaluated on a newly collected real-world test set spanning four different domains, our approach yields consistent improvements of up to +34.1% in accuracy across domains. Furthermore, we present an analysis of our approach and demonstrate that voice conversion helps mitigate the speaker bias in the ADI dataset. We release our robust ADI model and cross-domain evaluation dataset to support the development of inclusive speech technologies for Arabic.

Charting the Landscape of African NLP: Mapping Progress and Shaping the Road Ahead

With over 2,000 languages and potentially millions of speakers, Africa represents one of the richest linguistic regions in the world. Yet, this diversity is scarcely reflected in state-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) systems and large language models (LLMs), which predominantly support a narrow set of high-resource languages. This exclusion not only limits the reach and utility of modern NLP technologies but also risks widening the digital divide across linguistic communities. Nevertheless, NLP research on African languages is active and growing. In recent years, there has been a surge of interest in this area, driven by several factors-including the creation of multilingual language resources, the rise of community-led initiatives, and increased support through funding programs. In this survey, we analyze 734 research papers on NLP for African languages published over the past five years, offering a comprehensive overview of recent progress across core tasks. We identify key trends shaping the field and conclude by outlining promising directions to foster more inclusive and sustainable NLP research for African languages.

Attention on Multiword Expressions: A Multilingual Study of BERT-based Models with Regard to Idiomaticity and Microsyntax

This study analyzes the attention patterns of fine-tuned encoder-only models based on the BERT architecture (BERT-based models) towards two distinct types of Multiword Expressions (MWEs): idioms and microsyntactic units (MSUs). Idioms present challenges in semantic non-compositionality, whereas MSUs demonstrate unconventional syntactic behavior that does not conform to standard grammatical categorizations. We aim to understand whether fine-tuning BERT-based models on specific tasks influences their attention to MWEs, and how this attention differs between semantic and syntactic tasks. We examine attention scores to MWEs in both pre-trained and fine-tuned BERT-based models. We utilize monolingual models and datasets in six Indo-European languages - English, German, Dutch, Polish, Russian, and Ukrainian. Our results show that fine-tuning significantly influences how models allocate attention to MWEs. Specifically, models fine-tuned on semantic tasks tend to distribute attention to idiomatic expressions more evenly across layers. Models fine-tuned on syntactic tasks show an increase in attention to MSUs in the lower layers, corresponding with syntactic processing requirements.

Colombian Waitresses y Jueces canadienses: Gender and Country Biases in Occupation Recommendations from LLMs

One of the goals of fairness research in NLP is to measure and mitigate stereotypical biases that are propagated by NLP systems. However, such work tends to focus on single axes of bias (most often gender) and the English language. Addressing these limitations, we contribute the first study of multilingual intersecting country and gender biases, with a focus on occupation recommendations generated by large language models. We construct a benchmark of prompts in English, Spanish and German, where we systematically vary country and gender, using 25 countries and four pronoun sets. Then, we evaluate a suite of 5 Llama-based models on this benchmark, finding that LLMs encode significant gender and country biases. Notably, we find that even when models show parity for gender or country individually, intersectional occupational biases based on both country and gender persist. We also show that the prompting language significantly affects bias, and instruction-tuned models consistently demonstrate the lowest and most stable levels of bias. Our findings highlight the need for fairness researchers to use intersectional and multilingual lenses in their work.

Evaluating Grounded Reasoning by Code-Assisted Large Language Models for Mathematics

Assisting LLMs with code generation improved their performance on mathematical reasoning tasks. However, the evaluation of code-assisted LLMs is generally restricted to execution correctness, lacking a rigorous evaluation of their generated programs. In this work, we bridge this gap by conducting an in-depth analysis of code-assisted LLMs' generated programs in response to math reasoning tasks. Our evaluation focuses on the extent to which LLMs ground their programs to math rules, and how that affects their end performance. For this purpose, we assess the generations of five different LLMs, on two different math datasets, both manually and automatically. Our results reveal that the distribution of grounding depends on LLMs' capabilities and the difficulty of math problems. Furthermore, mathematical grounding is more effective for closed-source models, while open-source models fail to employ math rules in their solutions correctly. On MATH500, the percentage of grounded programs decreased to half, while the ungrounded generations doubled in comparison to ASDiv grade-school problems. Our work highlights the need for in-depth evaluation beyond execution accuracy metrics, toward a better understanding of code-assisted LLMs' capabilities and limits in the math domain.

Agree to Disagree? A Meta-Evaluation of LLM Misgendering

Numerous methods have been proposed to measure LLM misgendering, including probability-based evaluations (e.g., automatically with templatic sentences) and generation-based evaluations (e.g., with automatic heuristics or human validation). However, it has gone unexamined whether these evaluation methods have convergent validity, that is, whether their results align. Therefore, we conduct a systematic meta-evaluation of these methods across three existing datasets for LLM misgendering. We propose a method to transform each dataset to enable parallel probability- and generation-based evaluation. Then, by automatically evaluating a suite of 6 models from 3 families, we find that these methods can disagree with each other at the instance, dataset, and model levels, conflicting on 20.2% of evaluation instances. Finally, with a human evaluation of 2400 LLM generations, we show that misgendering behaviour is complex and goes far beyond pronouns, which automatic evaluations are not currently designed to capture, suggesting essential disagreement with human evaluations. Based on our findings, we provide recommendations for future evaluations of LLM misgendering. Our results are also more widely relevant, as they call into question broader methodological conventions in LLM evaluation, which often assume that different evaluation methods agree.