arXiv subjects

Amrit Gopinath

Publications and source records attributed to Amrit Gopinath.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Vectorizing Classical Tamil: Representation Learning for Verse-Commentary Pairs

We construct a corpus of 1,262 verse--commentary (urai) pairs from five Classical Tamil source sections, ranging from technical grammatical prose to modern paraphrase, and ask what information representation learning can recover. We train recurrent and Transformer encoders, a Siamese-style pair-matching network, an mBART-style encoder--decoder, and a decoder-only language model. Each analysis is interpreted against an appropriate control on the same data. TF-IDF provides a strong no-training lexical retrieval baseline, alongside representation analyses and generation controls for the learned models. A fixed string containing the 25 most frequent commentary words scores higher on generation overlap than the decoder-only model. Canonical correlation reaches 1.000 on Gaussian noise at these sample sizes, token-F1 spans only about 0.02--0.20 on this corpus, and the encoder--decoder continues to lower training loss for sixteen epochs after validation loss has begun to rise. One narrow result remains: the decoder-only model prefers authentic word order in 107 of 112 minimal-pair comparisons (95.5%), but does not reproduce held-out commentary content. We release the extraction and evaluation protocol; redistribution of the source commentaries remains subject to permission.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

A Declarative-Procedural Perspective on Expert Routing in Bilingual Mixture-of-Experts Language Models

We investigate whether Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) language models develop linguistically structured expert routing during bilingual language acquisition. Inspired by the Declarative-Procedural framework, we analyze lexical, grammatical, and syntactic processing in a decoder-only English-German MoE Transformer trained under sequential language exposure. We construct a probe-based validation set and extract token-level routing distributions to quantify category-dependent specialisation using mutual information, routing entropy, and Jensen-Shannon distance. The curriculum-trained model exhibits a peak mutual information of 0.1148 at layer 5, indicating category-dependent differences in routing distributions across linguistic categories. Surprisingly, a no-curriculum baseline trained on mixed English-German data shows stronger aggregate specialisation, reaching a peak mutual information of 0.2599 at the same layer. These results suggest that interpretable linguistic organization emerges within MoE routing patterns even without sequential language exposure. A replication at a second training seed shows that the no-curriculum condition's specialisation concentrates on a single language whose identity is seed-dependent, whereas the curriculum consistently yields a stable, language-balanced routing profile; rather than uniformly increasing specialisation, staged bilingual exposure reduces single-language dominance. The official Github repository: https://github.com/Amrit828/DP-Theory-MOE-Interpretability-Research

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

COVER: Identifiable Evaluation of Coalition Routing

When a multi-agent system changes its team, it also changes the messages and final answer it produces, so an end-to-end accuracy gap does not by itself identify a routing effect. We introduce method, an evaluation contract that fixes a public information boundary, downstream stack G, and finite legal team family before outcomes are generated. Complete coverage identifies exact finite-benchmark oracle regret conditional on that stack. For any finite collection of frozen policies, executing the union of their distinct selected teams is the minimal assumption-free support for every pairwise policy contrast, though not for absolute oracle regret. Two controlled tables with source-ID-disjoint splits test the instrument. On MuSiQue-12, a pre-specified privileged positive control improves regret from 0.532 to 0.402; a later public-interface control reaches 0.424 versus 0.554 but is retrospective. On HotpotQA-4, a pre-specified public direct scorer improves regret from 0.313 to 0.110. In fixed-stack Llama execution, verified route regret improves by 0.190, while the raw-answer gain is 0.010 with an interval crossing zero. A five-family ToolSandbox variant-shift validation exhaustively evaluates 16 declared teams on 14 untouched task variants (224/224 valid rows): the declared-family oracle reaches 0.768 safe-evidence completion, while the prospectively frozen router gets 0.637 (regret 0.131), failing the predeclared 0.10 criterion. A later retrospective comparator reaches 0.655, matching all-workers with 4.57 versus 5.00 workers on average. Thus COVER exposes selection headroom without manufacturing a routing win. A crossed-stack diagnostic shows absolute scores depend on G but finds no detectable router-by-finalizer interaction. COVER is an auditable measurement methodology, not a claim of stack-invariant or universal agent-routing superiority.

cs.AI↗