arXiv Machine Learning

MRMAD: A Multi-Round Multi-Audio Benchmark for Evaluating Acoustic Degradation Perception in Large Audio-Language Models

arXiv AI
Oct 26

AU-Harness: An Open-Source Toolkit for Efficient and Unified Evaluation of AUdio-LLMs

AU-Harness is an open-source toolkit designed to streamline and standardize the evaluation of Audio Language Models (LALMs). It addresses three key limitations of existing frameworks: slow processing pipelines, lack of multi-turn dialogue support, and absence of a scalable, unified evaluation system. The toolkit achieves a 77% reduction in evaluation time, enabling large-scale studies and providing standardized protocols for fair model comparison and in-depth analysis of audio reasoning capabilities.

By Hoang Nguyen, Sidharth Surapaneni, Akshay Kalkunte, Jash Mehta, Aman Tiwari, Oluwanifemi Bamgbose, Khyati Mahajan, Jash Shah, Shruthan Radhakrishna, Sathwik Tejaswi Madhusudhan, Vikas Yadav, Sai Rajeswar
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 17

A Closer Look at Failure Modes in Temporal Understanding of Large Audio-Language Models

arXiv:2606. 17417v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Audio Language Models (LALMs) achieve strong performance on a variety of audio understanding tasks but continue to struggle with temporal reasoning, a fundamental capability central to human auditory perception.

By Apoorva Kulkarni, Kaousheik Jayakumar, Sreyan Ghosh, Sarah Wiegreffe, Dinesh Manocha, Ramani Duraiswami
arXiv AI
Sep 23

When Scaling Fails: Mitigating Audio Perception Decay of LALMs via Multi-Step Perception-Aware Reasoning

arXiv:2603.02266v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Test-Time Scaling has shown notable efficacy in addressing complex problems through scaling inference compute. However, within Large Audio-La...

By Ruixiang Mao, Xiangnan Ma, Dan Chen, Ziming Zhu, Yuan Ge, Aokai Hao, Haishu Zhao, Yifu Huo, Qing Yang, Kaiyan Chang, Xiaoqian Liu, Chenglong Wang, Qiaozhi He, Tong Xiao, Jingbo Zhu
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 14

What Did the MLLM Hear? Token-Level Spectro-Temporal Grounding for Audio MLLM Explainability

The paper introduces STAG, a post‑hoc framework that provides token‑level spectro‑temporal grounding for captions produced by audio‑based multimodal large language models (MLLMs). STAG estimates temporal support for each token via vocabulary projections of encoded audio, measures frequency‑band relevance through controlled spectral occlusion, and fuses these signals into a spectro‑temporal relevance map. Evaluations across ten explanation methods and four grounding benchmarks show that STAG achieves superior event‑localization performance on every dataset, and counterfactual deletion experiments confirm that removing the identified evidence selectively reduces model confidence and often eliminates the corresponding event from regenerated captions.

By Lucia Cascone, Valeria Fraenza, Michele Nappi, Fabio Narducci, Benedetto Simone
arXiv AI
Aug 28

When Text Misleads: Inconsistent-Aware Reasoning for Audio-Grounded Dialogue

The paper introduces ContraTalk, a benchmark that tests whether dialogue models truly use acoustic cues or rely on transcript shortcuts. It formalizes cross‑modal disagreement, creates conflict and consistent QA examples, and proposes an Audio Twin representation to expose acoustic evidence to models. Experiments show that while text‑only LLMs perform well on consistent cases, they falter on conflict cases, and AudioLLMs only partially mitigate this issue.

By Yen-Ju Lu, Yuzhe Wang, Yaohan Guan, Xiluo He, Jiarui Hai, Mingrui Liang, Kaavya Chaparala, Thomas Thebaud, Laureano Moro-Velazquez, Najim Dehak, Jesus Villalba
arXiv AI
Sep 2

Heard but Not Heeded: Paralinguistic Information Encoding and Loss in Audio-Language Models

The paper investigates whether audio‑language models capture paralinguistic cues beyond spoken content. Using the Expresso dataset and four open‑source models, the authors trace how speaking style information is encoded in the late layers of the audio encoder but is degraded before reaching the final output. They find that some models are content‑driven while others are acoustic‑driven, revealing a gap between what is encoded and what is utilized in current audio‑language models.

By Bhuvan Koduru, Dareen Safar B Alharthi, Rita Singh, Bhiksha Raj