Today’s MT research digest centers on practical translation systems, with a strong emphasis on cost-aware tool use, domain adaptation, and how models behave in interactive settings. Across the selections, a common thread is evaluation: several papers probe real-world robustness, from auditing training data and benchmarking memory to studying how responses support user interaction.

Explain Like I'm 5 or Whatever I Choose: Evaluating the Interactive Potential of Language Model Responses

Evaluations of large language models (LLMs) in scientific information seeking tasks have become increasingly use-centric, such as conducting live or multi-turn evaluations with real users. These evaluations still assume a single, static chat interface, but as models are integrated into new interfaces, evaluations must shift to incorporate interface-specific criteria. We propose a new evaluation framework based on a formative study with $16$ participants that tests models' ability to generate multiple responses to one query that differ along an interpretable axis of language (language complexity), inspired by direct manipulation interfaces from human-centered design literature. We evaluate GPT-5.1, GPT-5 mini, Claude Sonnet 4.5 + Thinking, and DeepSeek-V3.1 by generating 5 responses at different levels of language complexity for $98$ scientific queries. While models vary complexity across responses, most changes remain inconsistent, with the best performing model (Claude Sonnet 4.5) only shifting reliable complexity measures in the correct direction $46\%$ of the time. Our findings hold with increased sample size and alternative complexity levels.

MMAE: A Massive Multitask Audio Editing Benchmark

We introduce MMAE, a Massive Multitask Audio Editing benchmark, serving as the first comprehensive evaluation testbed designed for general-purpose instruction-based audio editing. Spurred by the shift toward intelligent creation, interactive editing has rapidly expanded from visual domains, pioneered by models like Nano-banana 2 for images and Gemini-Omni for video, into audio. However, the current evaluation infrastructure lags severely, remaining highly fragmented and restricted to specific subdomains or basic operations. Unlike existing benchmarks that are limited in scope, MMAE extends to a broad spectrum of real-world scenarios, encompassing 7 distinct audio modalities, including sound, speech, music, and their mixtures. Furthermore, we establish a comprehensive taxonomy spanning 6 levels of task complexity, from basic modifications to multi-hop reasoning and multi-round editing, 2 levels of granularity, and 8 distinct operation types. Meticulously curated through human-agent collaboration, MMAE comprises 2,000 high-fidelity samples paired with a pioneering rubric-based evaluation framework. By decomposing free-form tasks into 17,741 verifiable criteria, this robust rubric-based paradigm enables a precise, multi-dimensional assessment of both instruction following and context consistency. Our extensive evaluation of leading models reveals that current systems remain far from achieving reliable edits. Strikingly, the Exact Match Rate (EMR) consistently falls below 5% and plummets to an absolute 0% in complex, mixed-modality tasks, exposing critical bottlenecks in precise execution and structural robustness. We hope MMAE will serve as a catalyst for future advances in the intelligent creation community, providing a clear diagnostic roadmap and establishing a standardized, long-lasting evaluation paradigm for next-generation audio editing systems.

Translate-R1: Cost-Aware Translation Tool Use via Reinforcement Learning

The performance gap across languages in LLMs is well documented, and closing it natively requires pretraining or fine-tuning on corpora that, for most languages, do not exist. Translation offers an alternative: converting an input into the model's dominant language unlocks its full capabilities at once. Applying translation to every input, however, is wasteful for languages the model already handles, while leaving the choice to the model fails in the opposite way, as LLMs are overconfident and skip the tool even when they cannot understand the input. Prior work resolves this with language-specific rules, domain heuristics, language identifiers, or external routers, each requiring manual engineering. We instead learn a single policy that decides when to translate from reward alone, developing language- and domain-adaptive introspection that assesses its own comprehension and invokes translation only when it cannot solve a task natively. Using data built by our answer-preserving translation pipeline, we continue RL on the post-trained Qwen3-4B across 22 languages in 3 resource tiers (High, Low, XLow) and 5 domains, and introduce confidence-gated GSPO for cost-sensitive tool use. The gated policy lifts reward over the baseline by +4.6 on High, +23.5 on Low, and +17.5 on XLow. Against an unconstrained policy that almost always translates, it preserves full reward at 63% of the cost and is Pareto-optimal across 87% of the cost-sensitivity range. Additionally, to simulate behavior on a completely unseen language, we create 2 synthetic languages, where our gated policy improves +18.7 over the overconfident baseline that underutilizes the tool even on these incomprehensible inputs. The policy transfers zero-shot to 9 held-out languages, and we analyze how tool use emerges over training, per language and per domain.

Auditing Training Data in Domain-adapted LLMs: LoRA-MINT

We present LoRA-MINT, a new methodology for Membership Inference Test (MINT) applied to recent Large Language Models (LLMs) fine-tuned for specific Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks through Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA). The primary goal is to assess whether individual samples were part of the training data of these adapted models, providing a useful auditing tool for the management of intellectual property and sensitive data. Our analysis explores the relationship between model perplexity and membership status, providing a systematic framework for estimating data exposure in fine-tuned LLMs. We conducted experiments on four models and three benchmark datasets, obtaining precision values in determining if given data were used for training ranging from 0.77 to 0.92, which outperform state-of-the-art baselines and demonstrate the robustness and generality of the proposed method. In general, our findings underscore the potential of LoRA-MINT as an effective and scalable framework for auditing LLMs, improving transparency, and fostering the ethical and responsible deployment of AI and NLP technologies. For the sake of concreteness and current relevance, our discussion and experiments are centered on LoRAadjusted LLMs, but note that most of the presented methodology is easily applicable for auditing training data given any other technique for adapting LLMs or, more generally, any other domain-adapted AI models.

M$^3$Exam: Benchmarking Multimodal Memory for Realistic User-Agent Interactions

Language agents are increasingly deployed over accumulating multimodal information, yet existing benchmarks assume a human-human form with sparse visuals and straightforward content, evaluating neither reasoning over authentic multimodal file interaction nor the interpretation of concealed user information. We therefore introduce M$^3$Exam, a query-centric multimodal conversational memory benchmark built on realistic user-agent interaction, with multi-dimensional evaluation spanning cross-modal grounding and implicit information inference. Benchmarking MLLMs and memory systems reveals persistent gaps in cross-modal grounding, cross session reasoning, and the efficiency cost of accumulating multimodal context. We further propose M$^3$Proctor, a multimodal memory method that detects query modality bias and consumes raw visual sources only on demand, improving accuracy by 13% while cutting index-construction time and retrieved tokens by over 70%.