LiT (Lost in Translation) - Implicit Content: leaderboard

Metric: MQM>=80 rate (%): share of round-trip translations whose back-translation to English scores at least 80 on an MQM error scale (minor -1, major -5, critical -25) from a Grok 4.1 Fast judge comparing it with the English source; each passage is translated serially through a four-language sequence and back, averaged over eight sequences (high, medium and low-resource languages); pragmatics passages on presuppositions and implicatures; higher is better. Source: arxiv.org. Saturation forecast: Around January 2027. 22 models tracked.

Top models

#ModelScore
1Qwen 3.5 397B A17B76.2
2GLM-571.4
3Gemma 4 31B (IT) (Thinking)70.8
4Gemma 4 31B (IT)69
5Kimi K2 (Thinking)67.6
6Qwen 3.5 397B A17B (Non-reasoning)66.7
7GLM-4.761.3
8Qwen 3 235B A22B 2507 (Thinking)60.1
9DeepSeek V3.2 Exp (Thinking)60.1
10DeepSeek V3.2 Exp (Non-reasoning)58.3
11GLM-5 (Non-reasoning)54.8
12Qwen 3.5 35B A3B54.2
13Kimi K249.7
14Gemma 3 27B (IT)49.4
15Qwen 3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct48.2

Interactive version: theaggregate.ai/benchmark?slug=lit-lost-in-translation-implicit-content · How It Works · Data refreshed daily, snapshot 2026-10-07.