We identify \textbf{Cross-lingual Collapse}, a systematic drift in which the chain-of-thought (CoT) of a multilingual language model reverts to its dominant pre-training language even when the prompt is expressed in a different language. Recent large language models (LLMs) with reinforcement learning with verifiable reward (RLVR) have achieved strong logical reasoning performances by exposing their intermediate reasoning traces, giving rise to large reasoning models (LRMs). However, the mechanism behind multilingual reasoning in LRMs is not yet fully explored. To investigate the issue, we fine-tune multilingual LRMs with Group-Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) on translated versions of the GSM$8$K and SimpleRL-Zoo datasets in three different languages: Chinese, Korean, and Ukrainian. During training, we monitor both task accuracy and language consistency of the reasoning chains. Our experiments reveal three key findings: (i) GRPO rapidly amplifies pre-training language imbalances, leading to the erosion of low-resource languages within just a few hundred updates; (ii) language consistency reward mitigates this drift but does so at the expense of an almost 5 - 10 pp drop in accuracy. and (iii) the resulting language collapse is severely damaging and largely irreversible, as subsequent fine-tuning struggles to steer the model back toward its original target-language reasoning capabilities. Together, these findings point to a remarkable conclusion: \textit{not all languages are trained equally for reasoning}. Furthermore, our paper sheds light on the roles of reward shaping, data difficulty, and pre-training priors in eliciting multilingual reasoning.

Generating images with a Text-to-Image model often requires multiple trials, where human users iteratively update their prompt based on feedback, namely the output image. Taking inspiration from cognitive work on reference games and dialogue alignment, this paper analyzes the dynamics of the user prompts along such iterations. We compile a dataset of iterative interactions of human users with Midjourney. Our analysis then reveals that prompts predictably converge toward specific traits along these iterations. We further study whether this convergence is due to human users, realizing they missed important details, or due to adaptation to the model's ``preferences'', producing better images for a specific language style. We show initial evidence that both possibilities are at play. The possibility that users adapt to the model's preference raises concerns about reusing user data for further training. The prompts may be biased towards the preferences of a specific model, rather than align with human intentions and natural manner of expression.