Skip to content
AI Atlas

AfriSyCo: Measuring Assertive Framing, Verification, and Wording Sensitivity Around African-Language Content

Published 17 Sept 2026arXiv:2609.17853

data quality89

Updated 24 h ago · first seen 17 Sept 2026

paper_01M2Q5C6RKRS0NJCCX1CM035M9

Abstract

AfriSyCo studies answer switching around African-language factual content with two complementary layers: native-language follow-ups and a controlled cross-language factorial whose question, options, and target remain in the African language while the follow-up framing is English. We analyze 1,415 turn-1-correct model-language-item observations derived from 100 source questions across seven open-weight checkpoints and six languages; turn-1-correct denotes observed first-response accuracy, not demonstrated knowledge. Under native prompts, assertive endorsement produces 29.3 percentage points more any-turn false-target selection than mention-plus-verification (M+V), with a 19.0-point immediate T2 contrast. In the precommitted 2 x 2 factorial, averaged over three tested prompt families, assertive framing increases target selection by 30.4 points (95% CI [28.4, 32.3]); verification decreases it by 17.4 points, while the assertive effect rises from 20.5 points without verification to 40.2 with it (interaction +19.7). The effect remains 34.8 points among 611 observations correct after option reordering. Magnitude varies sharply by wording and checkpoint: prompt-family effects span 20.1-42.5 points, a Twi/Qwen3 paraphrase shifts target selection from 70.8% to 4.2%, and checkpoint effects span 9.2-47.0 points. Prompt realization is therefore part of the measurement problem.

Authors

Authors 3

David Ababio AwuniElvis Gyasi OwusuRose-Mary Owusuaa Mensah Gyening

Linked names open researcher pages (created from the paper's author list; name-only, no affiliation unless a source states it). Unlinked names have no researcher record yet.

Organizations

Organizations 0

No organization stated. arXiv metadata does not carry affiliations; an organization is linked only when a model card or lab page cites the paper.

Models

Models introduced or described 0

Inbound described_by relations from model cards and documentation.

No model links this paper yet

Model pages link papers through their model cards and documentation; the relation is written only when a source states it.

Datasets

Datasets used 0

No dataset relation recorded.

Benchmarks

Benchmarks used 0

No benchmark relation recorded.

Code

Repositories & frameworks 0

No repository linked.

Timeline

Timeline 3

Full timeline →

Sources

Sources 3

Source documents
SourceDocumentTypeTierLast observedSnapshots
arXiv (Atom API + RSS)rss.arxiv.org/rss/cs.AI feedT1· Official24 h ago7
arXiv (Atom API + RSS)rss.arxiv.org/rss/cs.CL feedT1· Official24 h ago6
arXiv (Atom API + RSS)rss.arxiv.org/rss/cs.LG feedT1· Official24 h ago6

Tier 1 = official/primary, 2 = quality secondary, 3 = community, 4 = unverified. Every snapshot is archived; see all sources and the methodology.