PSK at SemEval-2026 Task 9: Multilingual Polarization Detection Using Ensemble Gemma Models with Synthetic Data Augmentation

Srikar Kashyap Pulipaka · May 6, 2026 · Citations: 0

Automatic Metrics

Open arXiv Find Implementation RSS feed Shortlist (0)

How to use this page

Low trust

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Validate the evaluation procedure and quality controls in the full paper before operational use.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

We present our system for SemEval-2026 Task 9: Multilingual Polarization Detection, a binary classification task spanning 22 languages. Our approach fine-tunes separate Gemma~3 models (12B and 27B parameters) per language using Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA), augmented with synthetic data generated by a large language model (LLM). We employ three synthetic data strategies (direct generation, paraphrasing, and contrastive pair creation) using GPT-4o-mini, with a multi-stage quality filtering pipeline including embedding-based deduplication. We find that per-language threshold tuning on the development set yields 2 to 4\% F1 improvements without retraining. We also use weighted ensembles of 12B and 27B model predictions with per-language strategy selection. Our final system achieves a mean macro-F1 of 0.811 across all 22 languages, ranking 2nd overall of the participating teams, with 1st place finishes in 3 languages and top-3 in 8 languages. We also find that alternative architectures (XLM-RoBERTa, Qwen3) that showed strong development set performance suffered 30 to 50\% F1 drops on the test set, highlighting the importance of generalization.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.

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

Should You Rely On This Paper?

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

A benchmark-and-metrics comparison anchor.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

5/100 • Low

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

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Detected

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 45%

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 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.