Skip to content
← Back to explorer

Towards Cross-lingual Values Assessment: A Consensus-Pluralism Perspective

Yukun Chen, Xinyu Zhang, Jialong Tang, Yu Wan, Baosong Yang, Yiming Li, Zhan Qin, Kui Ren · Feb 19, 2026 · Citations: 0

Open arXiv Find Implementation RSS feed Shortlist (0)

How to use this page

Coverage: Stale

Use this page to decide whether the paper is strong enough to influence an eval design. If the signals below are thin, treat it as background context and compare it against the stronger hub pages before making protocol choices.

Paper metadata checked

Feb 19, 2026, 11:41 AM

Stale

Protocol signals checked

Feb 19, 2026, 11:41 AM

Stale

Signal strength

Low

Model confidence 0.25

Abstract

While large language models (LLMs) have become pivotal to content safety, current evaluation paradigms primarily focus on detecting explicit harms (e.g., violence or hate speech), neglecting the subtler value dimensions conveyed in digital content. To bridge this gap, we introduce X-Value, a novel Cross-lingual Values Assessment Benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs' ability to assess deep-level values of content from a global perspective. X-Value consists of more than 5,000 QA pairs across 18 languages, systematically organized into 7 core domains grounded in Schwartz's Theory of Basic Human Values and categorized into easy and hard levels for discriminative evaluation. We further propose a unique two-stage annotation framework that first identifies whether an issue falls under global consensus (e.g., human rights) or pluralism (e.g., religion), and subsequently conducts a multi-party evaluation of the latent values embedded within the content. Systematic evaluations on X-Value reveal that current SOTA LLMs exhibit deficiencies in cross-lingual values assessment ($Acc < 77\%$), with significant performance disparities across different languages ($ΔAcc > 20\%$). This work highlights the urgent need to improve the nuanced, values-aware content assessment capability of LLMs. Our X-Value is available at: https://huggingface.co/datasets/Whitolf/X-Value.

Use caution before copying this protocol

Use this page for context, then validate protocol choices against stronger HFEPX references before implementation decisions.

  • Extraction flags indicate low-signal or possible false-positive protocol mapping.
  • Extraction confidence is 0.25 (below strong-reference threshold).
  • No explicit evaluation mode was extracted from available metadata.
  • No benchmark/dataset or metric anchors were extracted.
Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub

HFEPX Relevance Assessment

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

Background context only.

Main weakness

Extraction flags indicate low-signal or possible false-positive protocol mapping.

Trust level

Low

Eval-Fit Score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

HFEPX Fit

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence: Low

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here:

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub Tool-Use Eval Hub

What We Could Reliably Extract

Each protocol field below shows whether the signal looked explicit, partial, or missing in the available metadata. Use this to judge what is safe to trust directly and what still needs full-paper validation.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

Evidence snippet: While large language models (LLMs) have become pivotal to content safety, current evaluation paradigms primarily focus on detecting explicit harms (e.g., violence or hate speech), neglecting the subtler value dimensions conveyed in digital content.

Evaluation Modes

missing

None explicit

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

Validate eval design from full paper text.

Evidence snippet: While large language models (LLMs) have become pivotal to content safety, current evaluation paradigms primarily focus on detecting explicit harms (e.g., violence or hate speech), neglecting the subtler value dimensions conveyed in digital content.

Quality Controls

partial

Adjudication

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction evidenced

Calibration/adjudication style controls detected.

Evidence snippet: While large language models (LLMs) have become pivotal to content safety, current evaluation paradigms primarily focus on detecting explicit harms (e.g., violence or hate speech), neglecting the subtler value dimensions conveyed in digital content.

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

No benchmark anchors detected.

Evidence snippet: While large language models (LLMs) have become pivotal to content safety, current evaluation paradigms primarily focus on detecting explicit harms (e.g., violence or hate speech), neglecting the subtler value dimensions conveyed in digital content.

Reported Metrics

missing

Not extracted

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

No metric anchors detected.

Evidence snippet: While large language models (LLMs) have become pivotal to content safety, current evaluation paradigms primarily focus on detecting explicit harms (e.g., violence or hate speech), neglecting the subtler value dimensions conveyed in digital content.

Rater Population

missing

Unknown

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

Rater source not explicitly reported.

Evidence snippet: While large language models (LLMs) have become pivotal to content safety, current evaluation paradigms primarily focus on detecting explicit harms (e.g., violence or hate speech), neglecting the subtler value dimensions conveyed in digital content.

Human Data Lens

  • Uses human feedback: No
  • Feedback types: None
  • Rater population: Unknown
  • Unit of annotation: Unknown
  • Expertise required: Multilingual
  • Extraction source: Persisted extraction

Evaluation Lens

  • Evaluation modes:
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Adjudication
  • Confidence: 0.25
  • Flags: low_signal, possible_false_positive

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

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

Reported Metrics

No metric terms were extracted from the available abstract.

Research Brief

Deterministic synthesis

While large language models (LLMs) have become pivotal to content safety, current evaluation paradigms primarily focus on detecting explicit harms (e.g., violence or hate speech), neglecting the subtler value dimensions conveyed in digital content.

Generated Feb 19, 2026, 11:41 AM · Grounded in abstract + metadata only

Key Takeaways

  • While large language models (LLMs) have become pivotal to content safety, current evaluation paradigms primarily focus on detecting explicit harms (e.g., violence or hate speech), neglecting the subtler value dimensions conveyed in digital content.
  • To bridge this gap, we introduce X-Value, a novel Cross-lingual Values Assessment Benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs' ability to assess deep-level values of content from a global perspective.
  • X-Value consists of more than 5,000 QA pairs across 18 languages, systematically organized into 7 core domains grounded in Schwartz's Theory of Basic Human Values and categorized into easy and hard levels for discriminative evaluation.

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.

Recommended Queries

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • While large language models (LLMs) have become pivotal to content safety, current evaluation paradigms primarily focus on detecting explicit harms (e.g., violence or hate speech), neglecting the subtler value dimensions conveyed in digital…
  • To bridge this gap, we introduce X-Value, a novel Cross-lingual Values Assessment Benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs' ability to assess deep-level values of content from a global perspective.
  • X-Value consists of more than 5,000 QA pairs across 18 languages, systematically organized into 7 core domains grounded in Schwartz's Theory of Basic Human Values and categorized into easy and hard levels for discriminative evaluation.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • While large language models (LLMs) have become pivotal to content safety, current evaluation paradigms primarily focus on detecting explicit harms (e.g., violence or hate speech), neglecting the subtler value dimensions conveyed in digital…
  • To bridge this gap, we introduce X-Value, a novel Cross-lingual Values Assessment Benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs' ability to assess deep-level values of content from a global perspective.

Researcher Checklist

  • Gap: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Gap: Evaluation mode is explicit

    No clear evaluation mode extracted.

  • Pass: Quality control reporting appears

    Detected: Adjudication

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Gap: Metric reporting is present

    No metric terms extracted.

Related Papers

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

No related papers found for this item yet.

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.
Create Account & Post a Job
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.
Learn About Managed Service
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.
Join Now