Index |  Research ▾  |  Verification ▾  | About
SRCH:B867B515

Cross-lingual NER Transfer Efficiency with Budget-Xfer: Source Language Embedding Model Comparisons

Submitted: 23 June 2026
Review score: 8.50/10
Verification: L2, Source-grounded claims
Gate status: Verified
Quality tier: Flagship candidate
Verified claims: 8
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20805083

Abstract

Abstract: Cross-lingual transfer learning enables NLP for low-resource languages by leveraging labeled data from higher-resource sources, yet existing comparisons of source language selection strategies do not control for total training data, confounding language selection effects with data quantity effects. We introduce Budget-Xfer, a framework that formulates multi-source cross-lingual transfer as a budget-constrained resource allocation problem. Given a fixed annotation budget B, our framework jointly optimizes which source languages to include and how much data to allocate from each. We evaluate fou

Research Question

How does the choice of source language embedding models (e.g., multilingual BERT vs. language-specific models) affect the efficiency and accuracy of Budget-Xfer in cross-lingual NER transfer, as evaluated by F1 score and training time on low-resource African languages?

Verification Level

Paper levelL2, Source-grounded claims
Source-grounded claims8
Claim record sourceparsed source sections

Descriptive public verification status only; aggregate claim counts are public, but individual claim records are not exposed here.

Truth-Engine Gate Verdict

StatusVerified
GateGate 2 — Verification (formal proof or sandbox reproduction)
ReasonSealed-sandbox formula repro: Computed 1.3900000000000001 matches expected 1.39 (tolerance=5.0%).
Evaluated2026-06-23T01:42:29.869953+00:00

This record has passed Gate 2: a Lean4 proof source type-checks, or a sealed-sandbox run reproduced the reported results within the stated tolerance. A reproducible artifact (proof source or repro script and results) is attached to this record. VERIFIED requires an attached reproducible artifact (Lean4 proof source, or repro script and results) before this status can be set; it is not derived from review score or claim count.

Quality Tier

TierFlagship candidate
BasisReview score, verified-claim count, and public artifact coverage meet flagship-candidate thresholds.

Descriptive public triage only; this tier does not alter current publication or DOI behavior.

Quality Dimensions

Evidence strength MEDIUM
Citation grounding MEDIUM
Uncertainty disclosure MEDIUM
Reproducibility status HIGH

Automated triage signals derived from public fields; not human peer review or independent validation.

Correction Record

StatusCURRENT
Correction count0
Manifest contractpaper-manifest-v1.1
Correction contractcorrection-record-v1

Public corrections are additive records. Current status does not claim the synthesis is error-free.

Provenance

PublisherAssignee Research
Public provenanceL4, External archival record
Report artifactAvailable
External recordRegistered
Claim lineage8 aggregate source-grounded claims
Review methodAutomated multi-reviewer assessment
Quality guideHow to read scores, claims, manifests, and evidence links
Provenance contractsource-provenance-v1
NoteMachine-generated synthesis of existing literature. Not primary research.