# Evaluating Monolingual and Multilingual Large Language Models for Greek Question Answering: The DemosQA Benchmark

Source: [Evaluating Monolingual and Multilingual Large Language Models for Greek Question Answering: The DemosQA Benchmark](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/6997eaa809c33900fcd766a2>)

Collection index: [llms.txt](<https://www.sota2.com/research/llms.txt>)

Data updated: 2026-02-21T05:00:04.173Z

Authors: Charalampos Mastrokostas, Nikolaos Giarelis, Nikos Karacapilidis

Published: 2026-02-18T19:15:30.000Z

## Abstract

Recent advancements in Natural Language Processing and Deep Learning have enabled the development of Large Language Models (LLMs), which have significantly advanced the state-of-the-art across a wide range of tasks, including Question Answering (QA). Despite these advancements, research on LLMs has primarily targeted high-resourced languages (e.g., English), and only recently has attention shifted toward multilingual models. However, these models demonstrate a training data bias towards a small number of popular languages or rely on transfer learning from high- to under-resourced languages; this may lead to a misrepresentation of social, cultural, and historical aspects. To address this challenge, monolingual LLMs have been developed for under-resourced languages; however, their effectiveness remains less studied when compared to multilingual counterparts on language-specific tasks. In this study, we address this research gap in Greek QA by contributing: (i) DemosQA, a novel dataset, which is constructed using social media user questions and community-reviewed answers to better capture the Greek social and cultural zeitgeist; (ii) a memory-efficient LLM evaluation framework adaptable to diverse QA datasets and languages; and (iii) an extensive evaluation of 11 monolingual and multilingual LLMs on 6 human-curated Greek QA datasets using 3 different prompting strategies. We release our code and data to facilitate reproducibility.

## Recorded benchmark results

A research result applies to its stated dataset, split, metric and evaluation configuration. Compare like-for-like settings, preserve the metric's unit and direction, and distinguish paper-reported results from independent reproduction. The best result recorded here is not a claim of exhaustive, current global coverage.

## Original sources and implementation

[Original paper](<https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.16811>)

[PDF](<https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.16811.pdf>)
