Daily Papers

The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) has advanced the multilingual machine translation (MMT), yet the Curse of Multilinguality (CoM) remains a major challenge. Existing work in LLM-based MMT typically mitigates this issue via scaling up training and computation budget, which raises a critical question: Is scaling up the training and computation budget truly necessary for high-quality MMT, or can a deeper understanding of CoM provide a more efficient solution? To explore this problem, we analyze the linguistic conflicts and synergy, the underlying mechanism of CoM during post-training phase. We identify an asymmetric phenomenon in linguistic conflicts and synergy: the dominance of conflicts and synergy varies in different translation directions, leading to sub-optimal adaptation in existing post-training methods. We further find that a significant bottleneck in MMT appears to lie in post-training rather than multilingual pre-training, suggesting the need for more effective adaptation strategies. Building on these new insights, we propose a direction-aware training approach, combined with group-wise model merging, to address asymmetry in linguistic conflicts and synergy explicitly. Leveraging this strategy, our method fine-tunes X-ALMA-13B-Pretrain-trained only with multilingual pre-training-achieving comparable performance to XALMA-13B (only SFT) while using only 20B pretraining tokens and 17B parameters-5.5x fewer pretraining-tokens and 1.7x fewer model size-with just 0.85 COMET drop on Flores-200 testsets of 50 languages.

Several neural-based metrics have been recently proposed to evaluate machine translation quality. However, all of them resort to point estimates, which provide limited information at segment level. This is made worse as they are trained on noisy, biased and scarce human judgements, often resulting in unreliable quality predictions. In this paper, we introduce uncertainty-aware MT evaluation and analyze the trustworthiness of the predicted quality. We combine the COMET framework with two uncertainty estimation methods, Monte Carlo dropout and deep ensembles, to obtain quality scores along with confidence intervals. We compare the performance of our uncertainty-aware MT evaluation methods across multiple language pairs from the QT21 dataset and the WMT20 metrics task, augmented with MQM annotations. We experiment with varying numbers of references and further discuss the usefulness of uncertainty-aware quality estimation (without references) to flag possibly critical translation mistakes.

We describe pre-perihelion optical observations of interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS taken during July - September 2025 using the Nordic Optical Telescope. Fixed aperture photometry of the comet is well described by a power law function of heliocentric distance, rH, with the exponent (``index") n = 3.8+/-0.3 across the 4.6 au to 1.8 au distance range (phase function 0.04+/-0.02 magnitude/degree assumed). This indicates that the dust production rates vary in proportion to rH**(-1.8+/-0.3). An rH**(-2) variation is expected of a strongly volatile material, and consistent with independent spectroscopic observations showing that carbon dioxide is the primary driver of activity. The measured heliocentric index is unremarkable in the context of solar system comets, for which n is widely dispersed, and provides no basis on which to describe 3I as either dynamically old (thermally processed) or new (pristine). The morphology of the comet changes from a Sun-facing dust fan in the early 2025 July observations, to one dominated by an antisolar dust tail at later dates. We attribute the delayed emergence of the tail to the large size (effective radius 0.1 mm) and slow ejection (5 m/s) of the optically dominant dust particles, and their consequently sluggish response to solar radiation pressure. Small (micron-sized) particles may be present but not in numbers sufficient to dominate the scattering cross-section. Their relative depletion possibly reflects interparticle cohesion, which binds small particles more effectively than large ones. A similar preponderance of 0.1 mm grains was reported in 2I/Borisov. However, 2I differed from 3I in having a much smaller (asteroid-like) heliocentric index, n = 1.9+/-0.1. Dust production rates in 3I are 180 kg/s at 2 au, compared with 70 kg/s in 2I/Borisov at the same distance.

Context. Three kilometer-sized interstellar objects (ISOs) have been detected transiting the Solar System, and spacecraft have directly measured micrometer-scale interstellar dust (ISD). Yet no intermediate-size interstellar meteoroids have been identified in current meteor surveys. Aims. We test whether a power-law flux extrapolation connecting spacecraft ISD and kilometer-scale ISOs is consistent with meteor surveys, and we quantify the expected interstellar impacting flux based on various observational reports. Methods. We compiled differential fluxes and limits from spacecraft ISD, radar and optical meteor surveys, and theoretical estimates. We evaluated the power-law size-frequency fits, computed the 3I-like flux, and compared measured fluxes to predictions. Results. The spacecraft-measured dust flux exceeds extrapolations constrained by meteor surveys and kilometer-scale ISOs by sim2-7 orders of magnitude. An r^{-3.0} fit combining spacecraft ISD detections with kilometer-scale ISOs overpredicts the number of meteors with hyperbolic orbits, whereas slopes of r^{-2.7}-r^{-2.3} (derived from radar and optical meteor upper limits, respectively) instead yield interplanetary-to-interstellar flux ratios of 10^{3}-10^{6}. Conclusions. A simple power-law from ISD to ISOs is inconsistent with meteor survey constraints and yields unrealistic predictions for interstellar meteoroids. The data reveal a gap between submicron dust entrained in the Local Interstellar Cloud (LIC) and macroscopic bodies ejected from planetary systems. This gap may reflect distinct origins and destruction-transport processes rather than a continuous size-frequency distribution. This would imply either the dominance of a small-particle LIC component or the need to reassess spacecraft dust fluxes.