The paper introduces the Speech-Unsupported Rejection Evaluation Challenge (SURE‑Challenge), a benchmark designed to test whether speech‑LLMs should accept or reject audio inputs before generating answers. Using LibriSpeech‑derived transcriptions paired with first‑word question answering, the authors evaluate various noise and silence conditions, and compare a simple energy‑plus‑Whisper‑score rule against a Qwen2‑Audio front‑end. On a 474‑row test set, the rule rejects 196 of 204 unsupported inputs while preserving accuracy on supported data, revealing a pre‑generation error mode that answer‑only scoring misses.
By Mengzhe Geng
The paper introduces a reproducible framework that converts existing text-based tool‑calling benchmarks into audio‑based evaluations using text‑to‑speech, speaker variation, and environmental noise, while preserving original annotations. Experiments on seven omni‑modal models show that performance varies strongly by model and task, with notable gaps between text and voice results. The study also includes a stress test, a reference‑free LLM‑as‑judge protocol, and demonstrates that open‑source judges can match proprietary ones, aiding privacy‑preserving evaluation.
By Md Tahmid Rahman Laskar, Xue-Yong Fu, Seyyed Saeed Sarfjoo, Quinten McNamara, Jonas Robertson, Shashi Bhushan TN
arXiv:2603. 10827v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Speech-aware large language models (LLMs) can accept speech inputs, yet their training objectives largely emphasize linguistic content or specific fields such as emotions or the speaker's gender, leaving it unclear whether they encode speaker identity.
By Thomas Thebaud, Yuzhe Wang, Laureano Moro-Velazquez, Jesus Villalba-Lopez, Najim Dehak
arXiv:2607. 14753v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recent advances in text-to-speech and voice cloning make high-quality spoofing inexpensive and scalable, threatening voice authentication systems, especially automatic speaker verification (ASV).
By Sofya Savelyeva, Mariia Perunova, Evgeny Kushnir, Artem Dvirniak, Dmitrii Korzh, Oleg Y. Rogov
arXiv:2607. 14846v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Current voice AI benchmarks typically evaluate isolated capabilities such as speech intelligibility, word error rate, or text-based dialogue quality, but they rarely test whether systems harness the acoustic information that distinguishes spoken language from its textual representation.
By David Ayllon, Alice Baird, Jeffrey Brooks, Franc Camps-Febrer, Jakub Piotr C{\l}apa, Theo Lebryk, Jens Madsen, Olya Ossipova, Sharath Rao, Hoon Shin, Tigran Soghbatyan, Georg Streich, Rashish Tandon, Panagiotis Tzirakis
arXiv:2608.27817v4 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Speech and audio LLMs are evaluated by comparing waveform predictions with predictions from an automatic speech recognition (ASR) transcript....
By Mengzhe Geng
arXiv:2609.05871v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Audio-conditioned language models often underuse acoustic cues such as prosody, emotion, and non-speech sounds, raising the question of whether ASR-s...
By Song-ha Jo, Sehyun Lee, Soyoon Kim, Jaesik Choi, Sanghyuk Choi
The paper investigates whether audio large language models (Audio LLMs) can detect when their own transcriptions are unreliable. It finds that the models are poor at self-assessment and that existing methods offer limited detection. By leveraging audio-encoder representations, the authors develop a lightweight predictor that accurately flags unreliable transcriptions and can prompt user clarification without altering the underlying model.
By Amirhosein Javadi, Richa Dixit, Mehrdad Farajtabar, Minsik Cho, Devang Naik, Mohammad Samragh
arXiv:2609.03203v3 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Speech systems increasingly infer how an utterance should be delivered from context, but a plausible delivery plan may not be supported by th...
By Mengzhe Geng
VoxReason introduces a listener‑free evaluation framework that measures whether a speech planning system’s delivery choices—such as pitch, energy, rate, pause, emphasis, and stance—are grounded in cited source records before any waveform is generated. The system outputs a source‑cited speaking plan and uses a deterministic verifier to check citation legality, slot agreement, unsupported states, schema validity, and counterfactual locality. Experiments on 1,440 source‑label cases show that simple slot accuracy can be misleading, while a 7B locality‑based repair model significantly improves plan‑slot accuracy and locality, and removing source records sharply reduces the grounded score.
whyItMatters":"The framework provides a concrete, measurable way to ensure that expressive speech systems make source‑licensed planning decisions, addressing a source‑use failure that occurs before audio synthesis."
By Mengzhe Geng
arXiv:2607. 21820v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Audio deepfake detectors are trained to distinguish genuine speech from synthetic speech and often perform well on standard benchmarks.
By Daniyal Kabir Dar, Arun Ross
arXiv:2607. 11706v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern LLM-driven text-to-speech (TTS) and voice conversion (VC) systems produce synthetic speech that differs from the generators represented in many legacy spoofing benchmarks.
By Aastha Sharma, Guangjing Wang