The study investigates how multimodal large language models (MLLMs) use prosodic cues in sarcasm detection. By testing Qwen2.5‑Omni and Qwen3‑Omni on Mandarin Chinese and English across five modality conditions, the authors find that adding audio increases false positives without improving true positives. Acoustic error analysis shows that models rely on a stereotypical prosodic pattern—elevated pitch and irregular pausing—that does not align with genuine sarcasm cues, and manipulating these dimensions alone can raise false positive rates up to 60%. The same effect appears in Gemini 3 Flash Preview, indicating the heuristic is not limited to a single architecture.
By Yongjian Chen, Pengfei Wei, Yiqun Sun, Zhu Li, Lawrence B. Hsieh
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) process speech and text jointly, yet whether they exploit prosodic cues for pragmatic inference or rely on surface acoustic patterns has received little system...
arXiv:2606. 06168v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We present ProSarc, an audio-only framework that detects sarcasm by modelling temporal prosodic incongruity, that is, the mismatch between local prosodic dynamics and the utterance-level emotional baseline.
By Prathamjyot Singh, Ashima Sood, Sahil Sharma, Jasmeet Singh
DEAF (Diagnostic Evaluation of Acoustic Faithfulness) is a benchmark comprising over 2,700 conflict stimuli that test Audio Multimodal Large Language Models (Audio MLLMs) across three acoustic dimensions: emotional prosody, background sounds, and speaker identity. The benchmark uses a controlled multi-level evaluation framework that gradually increases textual influence, from semantic conflicts to misleading prompts, to separate content-driven bias from prompt-induced sycophancy. Diagnostic metrics are introduced to measure how much models rely on textual cues versus acoustic signals, and an evaluation of seven Audio MLLMs shows that while models respond to acoustic variations, their predictions are largely driven by textual inputs, highlighting a gap between benchmark performance and true acoustic understanding.
By Jiaqi Xiong, Yunjia Qi, Qi Cao, Yu Zheng, Yutong Zhang, Ziteng Wang, Ruofan Liao, Weisheng Xu, Sichen Liu
SpeechCritic learns a diagnostic speech judge from only about 300 human-labeled comparisons, calibrating a frontier audio-language model with non-binding hints that select acoustic measurements agreeing with human judgments. The approach improves dimension-level agreement by 6.3 points and reduces mismatch in Tie rates by 10.4 points, and training a 7B judge with SFT, OPD, and RL yields distinct behaviors, with RL producing more specific rationales. The method works across language pairs, demonstrating a path from limited human preferences to a diagnostic speech judge.
By Mingyue Huo, Shivam Mehta, Bhavin Jawade, Yinghong Lan, Haoqi Li
Prosodic cues can convey task-relevant information that alters the trajectory and outcome of a task-oriented dialogue, even when the words themselves remain unchanged. Yet existing benchmarks typically evaluate prosodic perception, response appropriateness, and task-oriented dialogue in isolation, making it difficult to test whether prosodic evidence changes downstream decisions.
arXiv:2610.23745v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Recent large audio language models (LALMs) have extended their capabilities beyond lexical speech understanding to tasks requiring paralinguistic and...
By Koki Ryu, Hitomi Yanaka
arXiv:2608. 09930v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Automated Text-to-Speech (TTS) evaluation methods (Mean Opinion Score (MOS) predictors and Audio Large Language Models (Audio-LLM) judges) are expected to reflect human perception, yet it is unclear how well they capture the distinct aspects of speech that listeners actually perceive.
By Oluwanifemi Bamgbose, Simon Rosen, Jash Shah, Lindsay Devon Brin, Hoang H Nguyen, Anke Koelzer, Rachel Hansen, Tara Bogavelli, Fanny Riols
The paper introduces VeriSpeak, a benchmark of 3,879 spoken claims for evaluating fact verification in Large Audio Language Models (LALMs). It shows a clear modality gap: models that verify written claims well often fail on spoken versions, and retrieval alone offers limited improvement. Combining retrieval with explicit reasoning yields the best performance, reaching 86.1% accuracy and demonstrating the need for grounded reasoning over retrieved evidence in speech misinformation detection.
By Debajyoti Mazumder, Mamta, Abhirama Subramanyam Penamakuri
arXiv:2607. 06611v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Automatically recognizing the sentiment, positive or negative, from speech is a challenging task, requiring both the analysis of vocal inflections and the interpretation of uttered words.
By Andrei-George Durdun, Victor Constantinescu, Radu Tudor Ionescu
arXiv:2608. 19515v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Prosodic cues can convey task-relevant information that alters the trajectory and outcome of a task-oriented dialogue, even when the words themselves remain unchanged.
By Xinyi Liu, Hooshang Nayyeri, Dilek Hakkani-Tur, Emine Yilmaz, JK Kim, Yifei Zhang, Charith Peris, Hari Thadakamalla
arXiv:2606. 27717v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Prosodic emphasis varies across languages, emotions, and speaking styles, yet existing emphasis detection models are largely trained and evaluated on monolingual neutral read speech.
By Megan Wei, Deepali Aneja, Jiaqi Su, Yunyun Wang, Haonan Chen, Zeyu Jin