MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409299747 · doi:10.1016/j.mlwa.2025.100649

Optimizing translation for low-resource languages: Efficient fine-tuning with custom prompt engineering in large language models

2025· article· en· W4409299747 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMachine Learning with Applications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsImpact
FundersUniversity of Pretoria
KeywordsComputer scienceTranslation (biology)Resource (disambiguation)Chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Training large language models (LLMs) can be prohibitively expensive. However, the emergence of new Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT) strategies provides a cost-effective approach to unlocking the potential of LLMs across a variety of natural language processing (NLP) tasks. In this study, we selected the Mistral 7B language model as our primary LLM due to its superior performance, which surpasses that of LLAMA 2 13B across multiple benchmarks. By leveraging PEFT methods, we aimed to significantly reduce the cost of fine-tuning while maintaining high levels of performance. Despite their advancements, LLMs often struggle with translation tasks for low-resource languages, particularly morphologically rich African languages. To address this, we employed customized prompt engineering techniques to enhance LLM translation capabilities for these languages. Our experimentation focused on fine-tuning the Mistral 7B model to identify the best-performing ensemble using a custom prompt strategy. The results obtained from the fine-tuned Mistral 7B model were compared against several models: Serengeti, Gemma, Google Translate, and No Language Left Behind (NLLB). Specifically, Serengeti and Gemma were fine-tuned using the same custom prompt strategy as the Mistral model, while Google Translate and NLLB Gemma, which are pre-trained to handle English-to-Zulu and English-to-Xhosa translations, were evaluated directly on the test data set. This comparative analysis allowed us to assess the efficacy of the fine-tuned Mistral 7B model against both custom-tuned and pre-trained translation models. LLMs have traditionally struggled to produce high-quality translations, especially for low-resource languages. Our experiments revealed that the key to improving translation performance lies in using the correct prompt during fine-tuning. We used the Mistral 7B model to develop a custom prompt that significantly enhanced translation quality for English-to-Zulu and English-to-Xhosa language pairs. After fine-tuning the Mistral 7B model for 30 GPU days, we compared its performance to the No Language Left Behind (NLLB) model and Google Translator API on the same test dataset. While NLLB achieved the highest scores across BLEU, G-Eval (cosine similarity), and Chrf++ (F1-score), our results demonstrated that Mistral 7B, with the custom prompt, still performed competitively. Additionally, we showed that our prompt template can improve the translation accuracy of other models, such as Gemma and Serengeti, when applied to high-quality bilingual datasets. This demonstrates that our custom prompt strategy is adaptable across different model architectures, bilingual settings, and is highly effective in accelerating learning for low-resource language translation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it