返回资讯列表
Evaluating Prompt Scope and Demonstration Similarity in Local LLM Machine Translation
2026年7月30日作者:AI铺子编辑部
大模型
26286v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as general-purpose translation systems, but their behavior ...
arXiv:2607.26286v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as general-purpose translation systems, but their behavior is usually evaluated under a single prompt shape: translate one source sentence into one target language. In practice, users may ask for one target language, for several related languages at once, or for translations conditioned on examples. This paper studies prompt scope and demonstration selection as experimental variables for local LLM machine translation. We evaluate English-to-Romance and English-to-Germanic translation on the full FLORES devtest split for nine official European Union languages. We compare three local instruction-tuned LLMs, llama3.2:3b, mistral:latest, and qwen2.5:14b, against dedicated MT baselines from OPUS-MT and NLLB-200. We test zero-shot prompting and k=5 few-shot prompting with random, lexical-similarity, and embedding-similarity demonstration selection. We also compare single-target prompts with JSON-formatted family-scope prompts that request all languages in a family at once. Results show that dedicated MT systems remain strongest overall, especially for Germanic languages. Few-shot prompting helps mistral:latest and qwen2.5:14b, but hurts llama3.2:3b; embedding retrieval is best on average for the stronger LLMs, but its advantage over random and lexical examples is modest. Family-scope prompting is feasible for stronger local LLMs but exposes structured-output failures in smaller models. These findings motivate evaluating LLM translation not only by language pair and metric, but also by prompt scope, retrieval strategy, and multi-target compliance.
来源:arXiv cs.CL | 查看原文
本文内容仅供参考,不构成任何投资或使用建议。AI铺子不对文章内容的准确性承担责任。 详情请参阅免责声明。