텍스트가 오해의 소지가 있는 경우: 오디오 기반 대화에 대한 일관성 없는 인식 추론

작성자

카테고리:

← 피드로
arXiv cs.AI · Yen-Ju Lu, Yuzhe Wang, Yaohan Guan, Xiluo He, Jiarui Hai, Mingrui Liang, Kaavya Chaparala, Thomas Thebaud, Laureano Moro-Velazquez, Najim Dehak, Jesus Villalba · 2026-09-09 AI

[Submitted on 27 Aug 2026 (v1), last revised 5 Sep 2026 (this version, v2)]

Authors:Yen-Ju Lu, Yuzhe Wang, Yaohan Guan, Xiluo He, Jiarui Hai, Mingrui Liang, Kaavya Chaparala, Thomas Thebaud, Laureano Moro-Velazquez, Najim Dehak, Jesus Villalba

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Understanding spoken dialogue requires joint reasoning over lexical content and paralinguistic acoustic signals such as emotion and conversational intent. However, existing evaluations often allow shortcuts based on transcripts or single-modality solutions, obscuring whether models genuinely ground predictions in speech. We formalize this failure mode as cross-modal disagreement, where transcripts suggest plausible but incorrect surface interpretations while acoustic cues such as prosody or speaking style support different answers. We develop a scalable framework that identifies text-biased surface interpretations and converts disagreement regions into conflict QA examples. We also include consistent cases where transcript-based and speech-grounded interpretations agree, enabling evaluation beyond adversarial audio dependence. This results in ContraTalk, a controlled benchmark containing 501 questions across five discourse dimensions: interaction behavior, emotion state, dialogue act, social stance, and conversational intent. We further develop an agentic-style reasoning framework that converts speech into an Audio Twin, a text-readable representation of localized acoustic cues that exposes acoustic evidence to the reasoning model. Experiments show that strong text-only LLMs exceed 90% accuracy in consistent cases but drop to 33-48% in conflict cases. Direct AudioLLMs provide only partial grounding, still selecting the transcript-biased trap in roughly 30-40% of conflict cases. Our Audio Twin framework improves conflict-case accuracy while reducing trap selection, but its consistent-case behavior remains backbone-dependent. These results identify transcript-based shortcuts as an important failure mode in spoken dialogue understanding and show that explicit acoustic evidence aggregation provides a more controllable interface for diagnosing and improving speech-grounded reasoning.

Submission history

From: Yen-Ju Lu [view email]
[v1] Thu, 27 Aug 2026 14:26:46 UTC (6,436 KB)
[v2] Sat, 5 Sep 2026 08:31:34 UTC (6,428 KB)

원문에서 계속 ↗

추출 본문 · 출처: arxiv.org · https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.27176