While AI development and evaluation for Southeast Asia (SEA) has grown rapidly, agent capabilities in regional languages are still poorly understood despite its importance to sovereign AI. To fill this gap, we introduce SEATauBench, the first agent-focused evaluation framework for SEA sovereign AI. It adapts Tau2-Bench to five languages—Mandarin, Vietnamese, Thai, Indonesian, and Filipino—and evaluates agents across progressively localized settings that vary the language of user-agent interaction, tool specifications, and task domains. Across three models, we find that English agent capabilities transfer reasonably well when only the conversation language changes, but quality and robustness degrade sharply as more task contexts are localized, with the largest losses in full domain adaptation. We also highlight the limits of English-only agent assessment for predicting agent capabilities in SEA languages. More broadly, SEATauBench provides a diagnostic benchmark and reusable adaptation pipeline for building reliable multilingual agents for linguistically diverse regions.

Federated learning (FL) enables collaborative training without raw data sharing, but still risks training data memorization. Existing FL memorization detection techniques focus on one sample at a time, underestimating more subtle risks of cross-sample memorization. In contrast, recent work on centralized learning (CL) has introduced fine-grained methods to assess memorization across all samples in training data, but these assume centralized access to data and cannot be applied directly to FL. We bridge this gap by proposing a framework that quantifies both intra- and inter-client memorization in FL using fine-grained cross-sample memorization measurement across all clients. Based on this framework, we conduct two studies: (1) measuring subtle memorization across clients and (2) examining key factors that influence memorization, including decoding strategies, prefix length, and FL algorithms. Our findings reveal that FL models do memorize client data, particularly intra-client data, more than inter-client data, with memorization influenced by training and inferencing factors.

Multi-step reasoning is essential for large language models (LLMs), yet multilingual performance remains challenging. While Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting improves reasoning, it struggles with non-English languages due to the entanglement of reasoning and execution. Program-of-Thought (PoT) prompting separates reasoning from execution, offering a promising alternative but shifting the challenge to generating programs from non-English questions. We propose a framework to evaluate PoT by separating multilingual reasoning from code execution to examine (i) the impact of fine-tuning on question-reasoning alignment and (ii) how reasoning quality affects answer correctness. Our findings demonstrate that PoT fine-tuning substantially enhances multilingual reasoning, outperforming CoT fine-tuned models. We further demonstrate a strong correlation between reasoning quality (measured through code quality) and answer accuracy, highlighting its potential as a test-time performance improvement heuristic.

Reasoning is one crucial capability in Large Language Models (LLMs), allowing them to perform complex tasks such as solving math problems and multi-step planning. While reasoning capability can emerge in larger models, smaller ones usually have to rely on distillation to transfer this capability from a larger model. However, recent efforts to distill reasoning capabilities have focused mainly on English, leaving multilingual distillation underexplored. To address this gap, this paper examines existing English reasoning distillation methods that utilize a variety of positive rationales in multilingual settings and proposes d-CoT-nR, a novel approach that incorporates incorrect rationales as additional guidance. Empirical results from multilingual high-school examinations show that d-CoT-nR significantly surpasses the baseline, improving accuracy in unseen languages and correctness in step-by-step reasoning.

Despite their promising results on standard benchmarks, NLU models are still prone to make predictions based on shortcuts caused by unintended bias in the dataset. For example, an NLI model may use lexical overlap as a shortcut to make entailment predictions due to repetitive data generation patterns from annotators, also called annotation artifacts. In this paper, we propose a causal analysis framework to help debias NLU models. We show that (1) by defining causal relationships, we can introspect how much annotation artifacts affect the outcomes. (2) We can utilize counterfactual inference to mitigate bias with this knowledge. We found that viewing a model as a treatment can mitigate bias more effectively than viewing annotation artifacts as treatment. (3) In addition to bias mitigation, we can interpret how much each debiasing strategy is affected by annotation artifacts. Our experimental results show that using counterfactual inference can improve out-of-distribution performance in all settings while maintaining high in-distribution performance.