# CNeo-Bench: Diagnosing Large Language Models on Chinese Neologisms

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.28053 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.28053/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 7 of its 20 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 28 Aug 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [ChatGLM: A Family of Large Language Models from GLM-130B to GLM-4 All Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12793/) (2024)
- [LLMSense: Harnessing LLMs for High-level Reasoning Over Spatiotemporal Sensor Traces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.19857/) (2024)
- [NEO-BENCH: Evaluating Robustness of Large Language Models with Neologisms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.12261/) (2024)
- [NeoAMT: Neologism-Aware Agentic Machine Translation with Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.03790/) (2026)
- [Benchmarking Machine Translation on Chinese Social Media Texts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.22931/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Chinese neologisms exploit diverse and unique linguistic mechanisms, such as phonetic substitution (e.g., 886 for ``bye-bye'') and visual character decomposition that are rare in other languages. We introduce CNeo-Bench, a benchmark of 4,759 such neologisms with reference definitions, organized into five top-level categories and nine subcategories by the linguistic mechanism behind each expression. CNeo-Bench is paired with a two-tier evaluation framework that separates whether a model can describe a neologism from whether it can operate on its underlying mechanism. Evaluating 18 LLMs, we find that Chinese neologisms remain an open challenge; most models fall below 40% on definition generation, and on several subcategories a systematic recognition-manipulation gap emerges: models describe neologisms correctly but, in source-form restoration tasks, substitute a semantic equivalent (paraphrase) for the source form rather than producing the source form itself. A few-shot analysis on 1,058 hard items shows that in-context examples can solve many difficult cases, but leave a noticeable portion of errors remaining, indicating challenges beyond prompting alone can address.