Code-Switching Curriculum Learning for Multilingual Transfer in LLMs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) now exhibit near human-level performance in various tasks, but their performance drops drastically after a handful of high-resource languages due to the imbalance in pre-training data. Inspired by the human process of second language acquisition, particularly code-switching---the practice of language alternation in a conversation---we propose code-switching curriculum learning (CSCL) to enhance cross-lingual transfer for LLMs. CSCL mimics the stages of human language learning by progressively training models with a curriculum consisting of 1) token-level code-switching, 2) sentence-level code-switching, and 3) monolingual corpora. Using Qwen 2 as our underlying model, we demonstrate the efficacy of the CSCL in improving language transfer to Korean, achieving significant performance gains compared to monolingual continual pre-training methods. Ablation studies reveal that both token- and sentence-level code-switching significantly enhance cross-lingual transfer and that curriculum learning amplifies these effects. We also extend our findings into various languages, including Japanese (high-resource) and Indonesian (low-resource), and using two additional models (Gemma 2 and Phi 3.5). We further show that CSCL mitigates spurious correlations between language resources and safety alignment, presenting a robust, efficient framework for more equitable language transfer in LLMs. We observe that CSCL is effective for low-resource settings where high-quality, monolingual corpora for language transfer are hardly available.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".