Cross-lingual open-ended generation -- i.e. generating responses in a desired language different from that of the user's query -- is an important yet understudied problem. We introduce XL-AlpacaEval, a new benchmark for evaluating cross-lingual generation capabilities in Large Language Models (LLMs), and propose XL-Instruct, a high-quality synthetic data generation method. Fine-tuning with just 8K XL-Instruct-generated instructions significantly improves model performance, increasing the win rate against GPT-4o-Mini from 7.4% to 21.5%, and improving on several fine-grained quality metrics. Additionally, models fine-tuned on XL-Instruct exhibit strong zero-shot transfer to both English-only and multilingual generation tasks. Given its consistent gains across the board, we strongly recommend incorporating XL-Instruct in the post-training pipeline of future multilingual LLMs. To facilitate further research, we will publicly and freely release the XL-Instruct and XL-AlpacaEval datasets, which constitute two of the few cross-lingual resources currently available in the literature.

As automatic metrics become increasingly stronger and widely adopted, the risk of unintentionally "gaming the metric" during model development rises. This issue is caused by metric interference (Mint), i.e., the use of the same or related metrics for both model tuning and evaluation. Mint can misguide practitioners into being overoptimistic about the performance of their systems: as system outputs become a function of the interfering metric, their estimated quality loses correlation with human judgments. In this work, we analyze two common cases of Mint in machine translation-related tasks: filtering of training data, and decoding with quality signals. Importantly, we find that Mint strongly distorts instance-level metric scores, even when metrics are not directly optimized for -- questioning the common strategy of leveraging a different, yet related metric for evaluation that is not used for tuning. To address this problem, we propose MintAdjust, a method for more reliable evaluation under Mint. On the WMT24 MT shared task test set, MintAdjust ranks translations and systems more accurately than state-of-the-art-metrics across a majority of language pairs, especially for high-quality systems. Furthermore, MintAdjust outperforms AutoRank, the ensembling method used by the organizers.

Many important tasks in Natural Language Processing (NLP), including information retrieval, classification, or regression, are built upon general-purpose vector representations. These representations are traditionally obtained from bidirectional encoder models, which aggregate information from the left and right contexts of each token (Devlin et al., 2019; Conneau et al., 2020; He et al., 2023). In contrast, recent advances in generative modeling have shifted the research community's attention towards unidirectional architectures (Bai et al., 2023; Llama Team, 2024; OLMo et al., 2025). Notably, these efforts have identified several key performance drivers that span architectural advances, data improvements, and increased scale. Yet, despite no apparent barrier to transferring these insights to bidirectional architectures, little effort has been devoted towards this objective, forcing practitioners to depend on outdated models. In this paper, we introduce a refreshed recipe for training general-purpose multilingual encoders, resulting in the EuroBERT family. Drawing inspiration from recent progress in decoder models, our models feature an updated architecture ( 2.1), and are trained on a 5T-token multilingual dataset, covering widely spoken European and global languages,

Larger models often outperform smaller ones but come with high computational costs. Cascading offers a potential solution. By default, it uses smaller models and defers only some instances to larger, more powerful models. However, designing effective deferral rules remains a challenge. In this paper, we propose a simple yet effective approach for machine translation, using existing quality estimation (QE) metrics as deferral rules. We show that QE-based deferral allows a cascaded system to match the performance of a larger model while invoking it for a small fraction (30% to 50%) of the examples, significantly reducing computational costs. We validate this approach through both automatic and human evaluation.

As large language models (LLM) become more and more capable in languages other than English, it is important to collect benchmark datasets in order to evaluate their multilingual performance, including on tasks like machine translation (MT). In this work, we extend the WMT24 dataset to cover 55 languages by collecting new human-written references and post-edits for 46 new languages and dialects in addition to post-edits of the references in 8 out of 9 languages in the original WMT24 dataset. The dataset covers four domains: literary, news, social, and speech. We benchmark a variety of MT providers and LLMs on the collected dataset using automatic metrics and find that LLMs are the best-performing MT systems in all 55 languages. These results should be confirmed using a human-based evaluation, which we leave for future work.

Alignment with human preferences is an important step in developing accurate and safe large language models. This is no exception in machine translation (MT), where better handling of language nuances and context-specific variations leads to improved quality. However, preference data based on human feedback can be very expensive to obtain and curate at a large scale. Automatic metrics, on the other hand, can induce preferences, but they might not match human expectations perfectly. In this paper, we propose an approach that leverages the best of both worlds. We first collect sentence-level quality assessments from professional linguists on translations generated by multiple high-quality MT systems and evaluate the ability of current automatic metrics to recover these preferences. We then use this analysis to curate a new dataset, MT-Pref (metric induced translation preference) dataset, which comprises 18k instances covering 18 language directions, using texts sourced from multiple domains post-2022. We show that aligning TOWER models on MT-Pref significantly improves translation quality on WMT23 and FLORES benchmarks.

Neural metrics for machine translation (MT) evaluation have become increasingly prominent due to their superior correlation with human judgments compared to traditional lexical metrics. Researchers have therefore utilized neural metrics through quality-informed decoding strategies, achieving better results than likelihood-based methods. With the rise of Large Language Models (LLMs), preference-based alignment techniques have gained attention for their potential to enhance translation quality by optimizing model weights directly on preferences induced by quality estimators. This study focuses on Contrastive Preference Optimization (CPO) and conducts extensive experiments to evaluate the impact of preference-based alignment on translation quality. Our findings indicate that while CPO consistently outperforms Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) on high-quality data with regard to the alignment metric, it may lead to instability across downstream evaluation metrics, particularly between neural and lexical ones. Additionally, we demonstrate that relying solely on the base model for generating candidate translations achieves performance comparable to using multiple external systems, while ensuring better consistency across downstream metrics.

The quality of open-weight LLMs has seen significant improvement, yet they remain predominantly focused on English. In this paper, we introduce the EuroLLM project, aimed at developing a suite of open-weight multilingual LLMs capable of understanding and generating text in all official European Union languages, as well as several additional relevant languages. We outline the progress made to date, detailing our data collection and filtering process, the development of scaling laws, the creation of our multilingual tokenizer, and the data mix and modeling configurations. Additionally, we release our initial models: EuroLLM-1.7B and EuroLLM-1.7B-Instruct and report their performance on multilingual general benchmarks and machine translation.

While machine translation (MT) systems are achieving increasingly strong performance on benchmarks, they often produce translations with errors and anomalies. Understanding these errors can potentially help improve the translation quality and user experience. This paper introduces xTower, an open large language model (LLM) built on top of TowerBase designed to provide free-text explanations for translation errors in order to guide the generation of a corrected translation. The quality of the generated explanations by xTower are assessed via both intrinsic and extrinsic evaluation. We ask expert translators to evaluate the quality of the explanations across two dimensions: relatedness towards the error span being explained and helpfulness in error understanding and improving translation quality. Extrinsically, we test xTower across various experimental setups in generating translation corrections, demonstrating significant improvements in translation quality. Our findings highlight xTower's potential towards not only producing plausible and helpful explanations of automatic translations, but also leveraging them to suggest corrected translations.

Automatic metrics for evaluating translation quality are typically validated by measuring how well they correlate with human assessments. However, correlation methods tend to capture only the ability of metrics to differentiate between good and bad source-translation pairs, overlooking their reliability in distinguishing alternative translations for the same source. In this paper, we confirm that this is indeed the case by showing that current metrics are insensitive to nuanced differences in translation quality. This effect is most pronounced when the quality is high and the variance among alternatives is low. Given this finding, we shift towards detecting high-quality correct translations, an important problem in practical decision-making scenarios where a binary check of correctness is prioritized over a nuanced evaluation of quality. Using the MQM framework as the gold standard, we systematically stress-test the ability of current metrics to identify translations with no errors as marked by humans. Our findings reveal that current metrics often over or underestimate translation quality, indicating significant room for improvement in automatic evaluation methods.