# Multilingual CheckList: Generation and Evaluation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.12865 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.12865/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 21 of its 33 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 24 Mar 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 21 of 21)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Unsupervised Cross-lingual Representation Learning at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.02116/) (2019)
- [Making the V in VQA Matter: Elevating the Role of Image Understanding in Visual Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1612.00837/) (2016)
- [mT5: A massively multilingual pre-trained text-to-text transformer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.11934/) (2020)
- [Multilingual Denoising Pre-training for Neural Machine Translation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08210/) (2020)
- [Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckList](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.04118/) (2020)
- [XNLI: Evaluating Cross-lingual Sentence Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.05053/) (2018)
- [XTREME: A Massively Multilingual Multi-task Benchmark for Evaluating Cross-lingual Generalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.11080/) (2020)
- [Annotation Artifacts in Natural Language Inference Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.02324/) (2018)
- [Dynabench: Rethinking Benchmarking in NLP](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.14337/) (2021)
- [Measuring and Reducing Gendered Correlations in Pre-trained Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.06032/) (2020)
- [XGLUE: A New Benchmark Dataset for Cross-lingual Pre-training, Understanding and Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.01401/) (2020)
- [Are We Modeling the Task or the Annotator? An Investigation of Annotator Bias in Natural Language Understanding Datasets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.07898/) (2019)
- [XTREME-R: Towards More Challenging and Nuanced Multilingual Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.07412/) (2021)
- [Breaking NLI Systems with Sentences that Require Simple Lexical Inferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.02266/) (2018)
- [Extending Multilingual BERT to Low-Resource Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.13640/) (2020)
- [Performance Impact Caused by Hidden Bias of Training Data for Recognizing Textual Entailment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.08117/) (2018)
- [Multi-SimLex: A Large-Scale Evaluation of Multilingual and Cross-Lingual Lexical Semantic Similarity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.04866/) (2020)
- [TaxiNLI: Taking a Ride up the NLU Hill](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.14505/) (2020)
- [Trusting RoBERTa over BERT: Insights from CheckListing the Natural Language Inference Task](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.07229/) (2021)
- [On the Universality of Deep Contextual Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07140/) (2021)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Empowering Cross-lingual Behavioral Testing of NLP Models with Typological Features](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.05454/) (2023)
- [IMPACT: Inflectional Morphology Probes Across Complex Typologies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.23929/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Multilingual evaluation benchmarks usually contain limited high-resource languages and do not test models for specific linguistic capabilities. CheckList is a template-based evaluation approach that tests models for specific capabilities. The CheckList template creation process requires native speakers, posing a challenge in scaling to hundreds of languages. In this work, we explore multiple approaches to generate Multilingual CheckLists. We device an algorithm - Template Extraction Algorithm (TEA) for automatically extracting target language CheckList templates from machine translated instances of a source language templates. We compare the TEA CheckLists with CheckLists created with different levels of human intervention. We further introduce metrics along the dimensions of cost, diversity, utility, and correctness to compare the CheckLists. We thoroughly analyze different approaches to creating CheckLists in Hindi. Furthermore, we experiment with 9 more different languages. We find that TEA followed by human verification is ideal for scaling Checklist-based evaluation to multiple languages while TEA gives a good estimates of model performance.