Idiomatic expressions pose a major challenge for multilingual NLP because their meanings shift between figurative and literal usage, often requiring context for accurate interpretation. Prior work has focused on high-resource languages typically evaluates isolated idiom-meaning questions, overlooking realistic discourse. We introduce MIDI, a multilingual idiom dataset spanning 3 high-, 3 medium-, and 12 low-resource languages, curated by native speakers. Unlike previous datasets, MIDI provides idioms embedded in both sentence-level and conversational contexts, capturing both literal and figurative readings. Benchmarking state-of-the-art models shows that idiom comprehension degrades in low-resource languages and that, in all resource tiers, literal interpretations are substantially harder than figurative ones. Conversational context improves performance but does not eliminate these disparities. Through controlled tests and interventions on hidden representations, we further separate memorization from reasoning, exposing core limitations of current models.

While automatic metrics drive progress in Machine Translation (MT) and Text Summarization (TS), existing metrics have been developed and validated almost exclusively for English and other high-resource languages. This narrow focus leaves Indian languages—spoken by over 1.5 billion people—largely overlooked, casting doubt on the universality of current evaluation practices. To address this gap, we introduce ITEM, a large-scale benchmark that systematically evaluates the alignment of 26 automatic metrics with human judgments across six major Indian languages, enriched with fine-grained annotations. Our extensive evaluation—covering agreement with human judgments, sensitivity to outliers, language-specific reliability, inter-metric correlations, and resilience to controlled perturbations—reveals four central findings: (1) LLM-based evaluators show the strongest alignment with human judgments at both segment and system levels; (2) outliers exert a significant impact on metric-human agreement; (3) In TS, metrics are more effective at capturing content fidelity, whereas in MT, they better reflect fluency; and (4) Metrics differ in their robustness and sensitivity when subjected to diverse perturbations. Collectively, these findings offer critical guidance for advancing metric design and evaluation in Indian languages.

Despite the impressive performance of multilingual large language models (mLLMs) in various natural language processing tasks, their ability to understand procedural texts, particularly those with culture-specific content, remains largely unexplored. Texts describing cultural procedures, including rituals, traditional craftsmanship, and social etiquette, require an inherent understanding of cultural context, presenting a significant challenge for mLLMs. In this work, we introduce CAPTex, a benchmark designed to evaluate mLLMs’ ability to process and reason over culturally diverse procedural texts in multiple languages. Using a range of evaluation methods, we find that (1) mLLMs struggle with culturally contextualized procedural content, particularly in low-resource languages; (2) performance varies across cultural domains, with some proving more difficult than others; and (3) models perform better on multiple-choice tasks presented in conversational formats than on direct questions. These results highlight the current limitations of mLLMs and emphasize the need for culturally informed benchmarks like CAPTex to support more accurate and inclusive language understanding.