In recent years, the non-deterministic properties of language models have garnered considerable attention and have shown a significant influence on real-world applications. However, such properties remain under-explored in machine translation (MT), a complex, non-deterministic NLP task. In this study, we systematically evaluate modern MT systems and identify temperature-constrained **N**on-**D**eterministic **MT** (**ND-MT**) as a distinct phenomenon. Additionally, we demonstrate that ND-MT exhibits significant potential in addressing the multimodality issue that has long challenged MT research and provides higher-quality candidates than **D**eterministic MT (D-MT) under temperature constraints. However, ND-MT introduces new challenges in evaluating system performance. Specifically, the evaluation framework designed for D-MT fails to yield consistent evaluation results when applied to ND-MT. We further investigate this emerging challenge by evaluating state-of-the-art ND-MT systems using both lexical-based and semantic-based metrics at varying sampling sizes. The results reveal a Buckets Effect across these systems: the ranking of ND-MT systems is dominated by the worst-quality candidate translation, as shown by automatic evaluation metrics. To mitigate this issue, we propose ExpectoSample, a strategy that first identifies reliable metrics and then enables robust ND-MT system selection for real-world.

As Large Language Model (LLM) alignment evolves from simple completions to complex, highly sophisticated generation, Reward Models are increasingly shifting toward rubric-guided evaluation to mitigate surface-level biases. However, the community lacks a unified benchmark to assess this evaluation paradigm, as existing benchmarks lack both the discriminative complexity and the ground-truth rubric annotations required for rigorous analysis. To bridge this gap, we introduce RubricBench, a curated benchmark with 1,147 pairwise comparisons specifically designed to assess the reliability of rubric-based evaluation. Our construction employs a multi-dimensional filtration pipeline to target hard samples featuring nuanced input complexity and misleading surface bias, augmenting each with expert-annotated, atomic rubrics derived strictly from instructions. Comprehensive experiments reveal a substantial capability gap between human-annotated and model-generated rubrics, indicating that even state-of-the-art models struggle to autonomously specify valid evaluation criteria, lagging considerably behind human-guided performance.

Recent advancements in Generative Reward Models (GRMs) have demonstrated that scaling the length of Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning considerably enhances the reliability of evaluation. However, current works predominantly rely on unstructured length scaling, ignoring the divergent efficacy of different reasoning mechanisms: Breadth-CoT (multi-dimensional principle coverage) and Depth-CoT (substantive judgment soundness). To address this, we introduce Mix-GRM, a framework that reconfigures raw rationales into structured Breadth-CoT and Depth-CoT through a modular synthesis pipeline, subsequently employing Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) to internalize and optimize these mechanisms. Comprehensive experiments demonstrate that Mix-GRM establishes a new state-of-the-art across five benchmarks, surpassing leading open-source RMs by an average of 8.2%. Our results reveal a clear divergence in reasoning: Breadth-CoT benefits subjective preference tasks, whereas Depth-CoT excels in objective correctness tasks. Consequently, misaligning the reasoning mechanism with the task directly degrades performance. Furthermore, we demonstrate that RLVR acts as a switching amplifier, inducing an emergent polarization where the model spontaneously allocates its reasoning style to match task demands.

Recent advances show that the world knowledge in the Instruction Fine-Tuning (IFT) dataset, which is incompatible with LLMs’ internal knowledge, can greatly hurt the IFT performance. However, the effective integration and balancing of the internal knowledge of LLMs, acquired during pre-training, with existing IFT datasets remains a largely underexplored area of research. To address this gap, this work introduces NILE, a novel framework to optimize the effectiveness of IFT by adjusting IFT datasets through carefully aligning the world and internal knowledge. NILE employs a three-stage pipeline to effectively quantify and adjust consistency with the internal knowledge of target LLMs. Our analysis provides compelling evidence that balancing such consistency with pre-trained internal knowledge is pivotal for unleashing LLM potential, and confirms that NILE can systematically contribute to these substantial performance improvements. Experimental results demonstrate that NILE-aligned IFT datasets sharply boost LLM performance across multiple LLM ability evaluation datasets, achieving up to 66.6% gain on Arena-Hard and 68.5% on Alpaca-Eval V2.

LLM-as-a-Judge, which generates chain-of-thought (CoT) judgments, has become a widely adopted auto-evaluation method. However, its reliability is compromised by the CoT reasoning’s inability to capture comprehensive and deeper details, often leading to incomplete outcomes. Existing methods mainly rely on majority voting or criteria expansion, which is insufficient to address the limitation in CoT. We propose Crowd-based Comparative Evaluation, which introduces additional crowd responses to compare with the candidate responses, thereby exposing deeper and more comprehensive details within the candidate responses. This process effectively guides LLM-as-a-Judge to provide a more detailed CoT judgment. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our approach enhances evaluation reliability, achieving an average accuracy gain of 6.7% across five benchmarks. Moreover, our method produces higher-quality CoTs that facilitate judge distillation and exhibit superior performance in rejection sampling for supervised fine-tuning (SFT), referred to as crowd rejection sampling, thereby enabling more efficient SFT. Our analysis confirms that CoTs generated by ours are more comprehensive and of higher quality, and evaluation accuracy improves as inference scales.

Comprehensively understanding and accurately predicting the performance of large language models across diverse downstream tasks has emerged as a pivotal challenge in NLP research. The pioneering scaling law on downstream works demonstrated intrinsic similarities within model families and utilized such similarities for performance prediction. However, they tend to overlook the similarities between model families and only consider design factors listed in the original scaling law. To overcome these limitations, we introduce a novel framework, Collaborative Performance Prediction (CPP), which significantly enhances prediction accuracy by leveraging the historical performance of various models on downstream tasks and other design factors for both model and task. We also collect a collaborative data sourced from online platforms containing both historical performance and additional design factors. With the support of the collaborative data, CPP not only surpasses traditional scaling laws in predicting the performance of scaled LLMs but also facilitates a detailed analysis of factor importance, an area previously overlooked.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently revolutionized the NLP field, while they still fall short in some specific down-stream tasks. In the work, we focus on utilizing LLMs to perform machine translation, where we observe that two patterns of errors frequently occur and drastically affect the translation quality: language mismatch and repetition. The work sets out to explore the potential for mitigating these two issues by leveraging model editing methods, e.g., by locating Feed-Forward Network (FFN) neurons or something that are responsible for the errors and deactivating them in the inference time.We find that directly applying such methods either limited effect on the targeted errors or has significant negative side-effect on the general translation quality, indicating that the located components may also be crucial for ensuring machine translation with LLMs on the rails.To this end, we propose to refine the located components by fetching the intersection of the locating results under different language settings, filtering out the aforementioned information that is irrelevant to targeted errors. The experiment results empirically demonstrate that our methods can effectively reduce the language mismatch and repetition ratios and meanwhile enhance or keep the general translation quality in most cases.