arXiv:2608. 06409v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Speech language models are increasingly evaluated on paralinguistic tasks by the accuracy of prompted answers, but answer accuracy combines failures at different stages of the audio-to-answer computation.
Summary generated by The Flow from the publisher's feed. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2606. 07309v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Instruction-following audio language models (ALMs) can be augmented with explicit acoustic cues, yet it remains unclear whether such cues are used in a grounded way when the raw audio is already available.
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.
Large Audio-Language Models (LALMs) have been widely used as judge models for the automatic evaluation of generated speech. However, prior approaches predominantly focus on holistic naturalness, leaving fine-grained paralinguistic distinctions underexplored.
arXiv:2608. 02235v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recent advances in neural text-to-speech (TTS) systems have substantially improved speech naturalness and intelligibility across many languages.
Audio-language models (ALMs) are increasingly used as judges for speech-to-speech systems, but a judge that receives audio may not actually use paralinguistic evidence. We introduce counterfactual audits for paralinguistic response evaluation.
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.