Skip to content
← Back to explorer

MENLO: From Preferences to Proficiency -- Evaluating and Modeling Native-like Quality Across 47 Languages

Chenxi Whitehouse, Sebastian Ruder, Tony Lin, Oksana Kurylo, Haruka Takagi, Janice Lam, Nicolò Busetto, Denise Diaz, Francisco Guzmán · Sep 30, 2025 · Citations: 0

How to use this page

High trust

Use this as a practical starting point for protocol research, then validate against the original paper.

Best use

Primary benchmark and eval reference

What to verify

Validate the exact study setup in the full paper before operational use.

Evidence quality

High

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Ensuring native-like quality of large language model (LLM) responses across many languages is challenging. To address this, we introduce MENLO, a framework that operationalizes the evaluation of native-like response quality based on audience design-inspired mechanisms. Using MENLO, we create a dataset of 6,423 human-annotated prompt-response preference pairs covering four quality dimensions with high inter-annotator agreement in 47 language varieties. Our evaluation reveals that zero-shot LLM judges benefit significantly from pairwise evaluation and our structured annotation rubrics, yet they still underperform human annotators on our dataset. We demonstrate substantial improvements through fine-tuning with reinforcement learning, reward shaping, and multi-task learning approaches. Additionally, we show that RL-trained judges can serve as generative reward models to enhance LLMs' multilingual proficiency, though discrepancies with human judgment remain. Our findings suggest promising directions for scalable multilingual evaluation and preference alignment. We release our dataset and evaluation framework to support further research in multilingual LLM evaluation (https://huggingface.co/datasets/facebook/menlo).

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper has strong direct human-feedback and evaluation protocol signal and is suitable as a primary eval pipeline reference.

Best use

Primary benchmark and eval reference

Use if you need

A concrete protocol example with enough signal to inform rater workflow design.

Main weakness

No major weakness surfaced.

Trust level

High

Usefulness score

75/100 • High

Use this as a primary source when designing or comparing eval protocols.

Human Feedback Signal

Detected

Evaluation Signal

Detected

Usefulness for eval research

High-confidence candidate

Extraction confidence 80%

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

strong

Pairwise Preference, Rubric Rating

Directly usable for protocol triage.

"Ensuring native-like quality of large language model (LLM) responses across many languages is challenging."

Evaluation Modes

strong

Automatic Metrics

Includes extracted eval setup.

"Ensuring native-like quality of large language model (LLM) responses across many languages is challenging."

Quality Controls

strong

Inter Annotator Agreement Reported

Calibration/adjudication style controls detected.

"Ensuring native-like quality of large language model (LLM) responses across many languages is challenging."

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

No benchmark anchors detected.

"Ensuring native-like quality of large language model (LLM) responses across many languages is challenging."

Reported Metrics

strong

Agreement

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

"Using MENLO, we create a dataset of 6,423 human-annotated prompt-response preference pairs covering four quality dimensions with high inter-annotator agreement in 47 language varieties."

Human Feedback Details

  • Uses human feedback: Yes
  • Feedback types: Pairwise Preference, Rubric Rating
  • Rater population: Not reported
  • Unit of annotation: Pairwise
  • Expertise required: Multilingual

Evaluation Details

  • Evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Inter Annotator Agreement Reported
  • Evidence quality: High
  • Use this page as: Primary benchmark and eval reference

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported Metrics

agreement

Research Brief

Metadata summary

Ensuring native-like quality of large language model (LLM) responses across many languages is challenging.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • Ensuring native-like quality of large language model (LLM) responses across many languages is challenging.
  • To address this, we introduce MENLO, a framework that operationalizes the evaluation of native-like response quality based on audience design-inspired mechanisms.
  • Using MENLO, we create a dataset of 6,423 human-annotated prompt-response preference pairs covering four quality dimensions with high inter-annotator agreement in 47 language varieties.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Check the full text for explicit evaluation design choices (raters, protocol, and metrics).
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • To address this, we introduce MENLO, a framework that operationalizes the evaluation of native-like response quality based on audience design-inspired mechanisms.
  • We demonstrate substantial improvements through fine-tuning with reinforcement learning, reward shaping, and multi-task learning approaches.
  • Additionally, we show that RL-trained judges can serve as generative reward models to enhance LLMs' multilingual proficiency, though discrepancies with human judgment remain.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • To address this, we introduce MENLO, a framework that operationalizes the evaluation of native-like response quality based on audience design-inspired mechanisms.
  • Additionally, we show that RL-trained judges can serve as generative reward models to enhance LLMs' multilingual proficiency, though discrepancies with human judgment remain.

Researcher Checklist

  • Pass: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    Detected: Pairwise Preference, Rubric Rating

  • Pass: Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Automatic Metrics

  • Pass: Quality control reporting appears

    Detected: Inter Annotator Agreement Reported

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Pass: Metric reporting is present

    Detected: agreement

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

Get Started

Join the #1 Platform for AI Training Talent

Where top AI builders and expert AI Trainers connect to build the future of AI.
Self-Service
Post a Job
Post your project and get a shortlist of qualified AI Trainers and Data Labelers. Hire and manage your team in the tools you already use.
Managed Service
For Large Projects
Done-for-You
We recruit, onboard, and manage a dedicated team inside your tools. End-to-end operations for large or complex projects.
For Freelancers
Join as an AI Trainer
Find AI training and data labeling projects across platforms, all in one place. One profile, one application process, more opportunities.