pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.10542 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-12 · 💻 cs.SD · cs.AI

Recognition: unknown

VidAudio-Bench: Benchmarking V2A and VT2A Generation across Four Audio Categories

Qian Zhang, Xiongkuo Min, Yixuan Gao, Yuqin Cao

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 15:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.SD cs.AI
keywords video-to-audiobenchmarkmultimodal generationspeechsingingvideo conditioningaudio quality metrics
0
0 comments X

The pith

VidAudio-Bench reveals that current V2A models generate speech and singing poorly compared to sound effects, while VT2A conditioning trades visual alignment against instruction adherence.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper creates VidAudio-Bench to test video-to-audio generation across four separate categories under both visual-only and visual-plus-text inputs. It runs eleven existing models on 1,634 video-text pairs and scores them with thirteen reference-free metrics that measure audio quality, video-audio match, and text-audio match, then confirms those metrics track human judgments. Results show consistent weaknesses on speech and singing for standard V2A models. The VT2A experiments expose a direct conflict: stronger visual signals improve alignment with the video but reduce the chance the output matches the requested audio type. This evaluation approach matters because immersive video needs reliable audio, and category-specific testing can show exactly where models need targeted fixes.

Core claim

VidAudio-Bench is a benchmark that covers sound effects, music, speech, and singing with both V2A and VT2A tasks. It supplies 1,634 video-text pairs, evaluates 11 state-of-the-art models, and applies 13 task-specific reference-free metrics for audio quality, video-audio consistency, and text-audio consistency. All metrics are validated by subjective human studies that show strong alignment with preferences. The experiments find that existing V2A models perform markedly worse on speech and singing than on sound effects. The VT2A results demonstrate a fundamental tension in which stronger visual conditioning raises video-audio alignment but often prevents the model from producing the audio the

What carries the argument

VidAudio-Bench, a multi-task evaluation framework that splits evaluation by audio category and by conditioning type (visual-only versus visual-plus-text) to isolate category-specific performance and conditioning trade-offs.

Load-bearing premise

The four chosen audio categories together with the thirteen metrics capture the essential quality, consistency, and adherence challenges in video-to-audio generation without major gaps or systematic biases.

What would settle it

A new model that scores equally high across speech, singing, music, and sound effects in V2A while preserving both visual alignment and text category adherence in VT2A without measurable degradation would contradict the reported gaps and trade-off.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.10542 by Qian Zhang, Xiongkuo Min, Yixuan Gao, Yuqin Cao.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of VidAudio-Bench. We categorize audio generation into four task types: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (a) Distribution of categories in the Instrument Performance subset. (b) Gender and age group distributions in the Speech and Singing subsets. leads to meaningful improvements or provides semantic assistance, in comparison to the V2A setting. We assess the fidelity of the generated visual descriptions using a hybrid validation strategy. For tasks with original labels (SFX and Instrument Performance), LLM-b… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Data distribution of the SFX subset. The inner ring [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Overview of the evaluation framework in VidAudio-Bench. For each audio generation task, we define a set of evaluation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Task-wise radar plots of eight representative mod [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Human preference correlation with VidAudio-Bench. This figure shows the Pearson correlation coefficients ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Content category distribution of the BGM subset. Speech subset. The Speech subset is constructed from the test split of AVSpeech. We first retain videos with durations of 9–11 seconds and standardize them to a uniform 10 seconds by padding or trimming. We then manually remove samples in which the speaker is visually too small for reliable lip-motion perception, as such videos usually contain unclear or bar… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Prompt design for BGM visual captioning Prompt Design for Speech Visual Captioning #Role : You are a visual character profiler. Your task is to describe the dominant visible speaker and scene in the video. #Task: Describe the person who is speaking and the environment. #Constraints: - Describe gender, approximate age, facial expression, and emotional state. - Mention the environment or scene context only … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Prompt design for SFX visual captioning Prompt Design for Instrument Performance Visual Captioning #Role : You are a precise visual captioning system for instrument performance videos. Your task is to identify the main visible instrument performance event and describe it concisely. #Task: Generate one sentence describing the dominant instrument performance visible in the video. #Constraints: - Only describ… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Prompt design for Instrument Performance visual captioning Prompt Design for BGM Visual Captioning #Role : You are a precise visual captioning system. Your task is to objectively describe what is visually observable in the video. #Task: Describe the visual content of the video. #Constraints: - Describe only what is visually observable. - Include the main subjects, actions, and environment when clearly visi… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: For singing, we use five categories, namely [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Prompt design for Identity Consistency. 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Prompt design for Affective Alignment on Speech. Prompt Design for Affective Alignment Category: Singing #Role : You are a professional multimodal evaluator for video–singing emotion alignment. Follow the evaluation protocol strictly. Use only predefined labels. Output must be valid JSON only. No extra text. #Task: Evaluate whether the emotion expressed in a silent video matches the emotion conveyed by th… view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Prompt design for Instruction Following. 15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Annotation interface used in the human subjective [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Examples of V2A and VT2A instruction prompts across four audio categories. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_18.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Video-to-Audio (V2A) generation is essential for immersive multimedia experiences, yet its evaluation remains underexplored. Existing benchmarks typically assess diverse audio types under a unified protocol, overlooking the fine-grained requirements of distinct audio categories. To address this gap, we propose VidAudio-Bench, a multi-task benchmark for V2A evaluation with four key features: (1) Broad Coverage: It encompasses four representative audio categories - sound effects, music, speech, and singing - under both V2A and Video-Text-to-Audio (VT2A) settings. (2) Extensive Evaluation: It comprises 1,634 video-text pairs and benchmarks 11 state-of-the-art generation models. (3) Comprehensive Metrics: It introduces 13 task-specific, reference-free metrics to systematically assess audio quality, video-audio consistency, and text-audio consistency. (4) Human Alignment: It validates all metrics through subjective studies, demonstrating strong consistency with human preferences. Experimental results reveal that current V2A models perform poorly in speech and singing compared to sound effects. Our VT2A results further highlight a fundamental tension between instruction following and visually grounded generation: stronger visual conditioning improves video-audio alignment, but often at the cost of generating the intended audio category. These findings establish VidAudio-Bench as a comprehensive and scalable framework for diagnosing V2A systems and provide new insights into multimodal audio generation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces VidAudio-Bench, a multi-task benchmark for Video-to-Audio (V2A) and Video-Text-to-Audio (VT2A) generation. It covers four audio categories (sound effects, music, speech, singing) using 1,634 video-text pairs, evaluates 11 models, and applies 13 reference-free metrics for audio quality, video-audio consistency, and text-audio consistency. All metrics are validated via subjective human studies demonstrating alignment with preferences. Key results show V2A models perform worse on speech and singing than sound effects, while VT2A exhibits a trade-off where increased visual conditioning boosts alignment but reduces adherence to the target audio category.

Significance. If the findings hold, the work supplies a category-differentiated evaluation framework that improves on prior unified V2A benchmarks. The evaluation scale, dual V2A/VT2A coverage, and human-validated metrics constitute a practical resource for diagnosing model limitations in multimodal audio generation. The reported performance gaps and conditioning trade-off supply concrete directions for future model development.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.2] §3.2 (Benchmark Construction): the sourcing of the 1,634 video-text pairs and any exclusion criteria for the four categories are not described in sufficient detail to assess potential selection bias or category representativeness, which directly affects the generalizability of the performance claims.
  2. [§5.3] §5.3 (VT2A Results): the 'fundamental tension' between visual conditioning and instruction following is presented as a central finding, yet the manuscript does not quantify the trade-off (e.g., correlation coefficients or per-model deltas between alignment and category-adherence metrics) or test whether it persists under alternative conditioning strengths.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Table 1] Table 1: the list of 11 evaluated models should include explicit citations or version numbers for reproducibility.
  2. [§4.1] §4.1 (Metric Definitions): a compact table summarizing the 13 metrics, their input requirements, and any tunable parameters would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We are grateful to the referee for the positive evaluation of our paper and the recommendation for minor revision. We address each major comment point by point below and will incorporate the requested clarifications and quantifications into the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3.2] §3.2 (Benchmark Construction): the sourcing of the 1,634 video-text pairs and any exclusion criteria for the four categories are not described in sufficient detail to assess potential selection bias or category representativeness, which directly affects the generalizability of the performance claims.

    Authors: We agree that greater detail on benchmark construction is needed to allow readers to assess representativeness and potential biases. In the revised manuscript we will expand §3.2 with a dedicated subsection describing the data sources for each of the four categories, the exact number of video-text pairs per category, the collection procedure, and all exclusion criteria (video duration, audio quality thresholds, content relevance, and category-specific filters). revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§5.3] §5.3 (VT2A Results): the 'fundamental tension' between visual conditioning and instruction following is presented as a central finding, yet the manuscript does not quantify the trade-off (e.g., correlation coefficients or per-model deltas between alignment and category-adherence metrics) or test whether it persists under alternative conditioning strengths.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this constructive suggestion. We will revise §5.3 to quantify the trade-off by reporting Pearson (or Spearman) correlation coefficients between video-audio alignment metrics and category-adherence (text-audio consistency) metrics across all evaluated models, together with per-model deltas. We will also add an analysis of how the observed tension varies with different strengths of visual conditioning in our existing VT2A experiments and include this in the revised section. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; benchmark evaluation is self-contained

full rationale

The paper introduces VidAudio-Bench as an evaluation framework with four audio categories, 1634 video-text pairs, 11 models, and 13 reference-free metrics validated via separate subjective human studies. No mathematical derivations, parameter fitting, or predictions appear; performance claims follow directly from applying standard metrics to independent model outputs on held-out data. Self-citations, if present, support prior metric definitions but are not load-bearing for the central experimental findings. The reported trade-offs in VT2A are observational results, not reductions to inputs by construction. This matches the default expectation of no circularity for benchmark papers.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The benchmark rests on standard audio evaluation practices and human subjective testing protocols without introducing new free parameters, axioms beyond domain norms, or invented entities.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Reference-free metrics can reliably proxy audio quality, video-audio consistency, and text-audio consistency when validated by human studies.
    Invoked to justify the 13 metrics and their use in ranking models.
  • domain assumption The four chosen audio categories (sound effects, music, speech, singing) sufficiently represent the space of V2A requirements.
    Basis for the multi-task design and performance comparisons.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5564 in / 1410 out tokens · 49688 ms · 2026-05-10T15:58:12.190023+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages · 7 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Hassan Akbari, Liangzhe Yuan, Rui Qian, Wei-Hong Chuang, Shih-Fu Chang, Yin Cui, and Boqing Gong. 2021. Vatt: Transformers for multimodal self-supervised learning from raw video, audio and text.Advances in neural information processing systems34 (2021), 24206–24221

    2021

  2. [2]

    Shuai Bai, Yuxuan Cai, Ruizhe Chen, Keqin Chen, Xionghui Chen, Zesen Cheng, Lianghao Deng, Wei Ding, Chang Gao, Chunjiang Ge, et al . 2025. Qwen3-vl technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.21631(2025)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    Abigail Berthe-Pardo, Gaspard Michel, Elena V Epure, and Christophe Cerisara

  4. [4]

    S-VoCAL: A Dataset and Evaluation Framework for Inferring Speaking Voice Character Attributes in Literature.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.00958(2026)

    work page arXiv 2026

  5. [5]

    Rachel M Bittner, Juan José Bosch, David Rubinstein, Gabriel Meseguer-Brocal, and Sebastian Ewert. 2022. A lightweight instrument-agnostic model for poly- phonic note transcription and multipitch estimation. InICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 781–785

    2022

  6. [6]

    Zhe Cao, Tao Wang, Jiaming Wang, Yanghai Wang, Yuanxing Zhang, Jialu Chen, Miao Deng, Jiahao Wang, Yubin Guo, Chenxi Liao, et al. 2025. T2AV-Compass: Towards Unified Evaluation for Text-to-Audio-Video Generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.21094(2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    Honglie Chen, Weidi Xie, Andrea Vedaldi, and Andrew Zisserman. 2020. Vg- gsound: A large-scale audio-visual dataset. InICASSP 2020-2020 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 721–725

    2020

  8. [8]

    Ziyang Chen, Daniel Geng, and Andrew Owens. 2024. Images that sound: Composing images and sounds on a single canvas.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems37 (2024), 85045–85073

    2024

  9. [9]

    Ziyang Chen, Prem Seetharaman, Bryan Russell, Oriol Nieto, David Bourgin, Andrew Owens, and Justin Salamon. 2025. Video-guided foley sound generation with multimodal controls. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference. 18770–18781

    2025

  10. [10]

    Ho Kei Cheng, Masato Ishii, Akio Hayakawa, Takashi Shibuya, Alexander Schwing, and Yuki Mitsufuji. 2025. Mmaudio: Taming multimodal joint training for high-quality video-to-audio synthesis. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference. 28901–28911

    2025

  11. [11]

    Gheorghe Comanici, Eric Bieber, Mike Schaekermann, Ice Pasupat, Noveen Sachdeva, Inderjit Dhillon, Marcel Blistein, Ori Ram, Dan Zhang, Evan Rosen, et al. 2025. Gemini 2.5: Pushing the frontier with advanced reasoning, multi- modality, long context, and next generation agentic capabilities.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.06261(2025)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Fredrik Cumlin, Xinyu Liang, Victor Ungureanu, Chandan KA Reddy, Christian Schüldt, and Saikat Chatterjee. 2024. DNSMOS Pro: A Reduced-Size DNN for Probabilistic MOS of Speech. InInterspeech

    2024

  13. [13]

    Yusheng Dai, Zehua Chen, Yuxuan Jiang, Baolong Gao, Qiuhong Ke, Jun Zhu, and Jianfei Cai. 2026. Omni2Sound: Towards Unified Video-Text-to-Audio Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.02731(2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  14. [14]

    Shangzhe Di, Zeren Jiang, Si Liu, Zhaokai Wang, Leyan Zhu, Zexin He, Hong- ming Liu, and Shuicheng Yan. 2021. Video background music generation with controllable music transformer. InProceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Multimedia. 2037–2045

    2021

  15. [15]

    Hao-Wen Dong, Wen-Yi Hsiao, and Yi-Hsuan Yang. 2018. Pypianoroll: Open source Python package for handling multitrack pianoroll.Proc. ISMIR. Late- breaking paper(2018)

    2018

  16. [16]

    Ariel Ephrat, Inbar Mosseri, Oran Lang, Tali Dekel, Kevin Wilson, Avinatan Hassidim, William T Freeman, and Michael Rubinstein. 2018. Looking to listen at the cocktail party: a speaker-independent audio-visual model for speech separation.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)37, 4 (2018), 1–11

    2018

  17. [17]

    Jort F Gemmeke, Daniel PW Ellis, Dylan Freedman, Aren Jansen, Wade Lawrence, R Channing Moore, Manoj Plakal, and Marvin Ritter. 2017. Audio set: An ontology and human-labeled dataset for audio events. In2017 IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 776–780

    2017

  18. [18]

    Rohit Girdhar, Alaaeldin El-Nouby, Zhuang Liu, Mannat Singh, Kalyan Vasudev Alwala, Armand Joulin, and Ishan Misra. 2023. Imagebind: One embedding space to bind them all. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 15180–15190

    2023

  19. [19]

    Daili Hua, Xizhi Wang, Bohan Zeng, Xinyi Huang, Hao Liang, Junbo Niu, Xinlong Chen, Quanqing Xu, and Wentao Zhang. 2025. Vabench: A comprehensive benchmark for audio-video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.09299(2025)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    Po-Yao Huang, Hu Xu, Juncheng Li, Alexei Baevski, Michael Auli, Wojciech Galuba, Florian Metze, and Christoph Feichtenhofer. 2022. Masked autoencoders that listen.Advances in neural information processing systems35 (2022), 28708– 28720

    2022

  21. [21]

    Rongjie Huang, Jiawei Huang, Dongchao Yang, Yi Ren, Luping Liu, Mingze Li, Zhenhui Ye, Jinglin Liu, Xiang Yin, and Zhou Zhao. 2023. Make-an-audio: Text- to-audio generation with prompt-enhanced diffusion models. InInternational Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 13916–13932

    2023

  22. [22]

    Ziqi Huang, Yinan He, Jiashuo Yu, Fan Zhang, Chenyang Si, Yuming Jiang, Yuanhan Zhang, Tianxing Wu, Qingyang Jin, Nattapol Chanpaisit, et al. 2024. Vbench: Comprehensive benchmark suite for video generative models. InPro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 21807–21818

    2024

  23. [23]

    Aaron Hurst, Adam Lerer, Adam P Goucher, Adam Perelman, Aditya Ramesh, Aidan Clark, AJ Ostrow, Akila Welihinda, Alan Hayes, Alec Radford, et al. 2024. Gpt-4o system card.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.21276(2024)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Vladimir Iashin and Esa Rahtu. 2021. Taming Visually Guided Sound Generation. InBritish Machine Vision Conference. BMVA Press

    2021

  25. [25]

    Vladimir Iashin, Weidi Xie, Esa Rahtu, and Andrew Zisserman. 2024. Synch- former: Efficient synchronization from sparse cues. InICASSP 2024-2024 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 5325–5329

    2024

  26. [26]

    Wonwoo Jeong. 2026. An Empirical Analysis of Task-Induced Encoder Bias in Fr\’echet Audio Distance.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.23958(2026)

    work page arXiv 2026

  27. [27]

    Yujin Jeong, Yunji Kim, Sanghyuk Chun, and Jiyoung Lee. 2025. Read, watch and scream! sound generation from text and video. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 39. 17590–17598

    2025

  28. [28]

    Felix Kreuk, Gabriel Synnaeve, Adam Polyak, Uriel Singer, Alexandre Défossez, Jade Copet, Devi Parikh, Yaniv Taigman, and Yossi Adi. [n. d.]. AudioGen: Textually Guided Audio Generation. InThe Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations

  29. [29]

    Chunyu Li, Chao Zhang, Weikai Xu, Jingyu Lin, Jinghui Xie, Weiguo Feng, Bingyue Peng, Cunjian Chen, and Weiwei Xing. 2024. Latentsync: Taming audio- conditioned latent diffusion models for lip sync with syncnet supervision.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.09262(2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    Susan Liang, Chao Huang, Filippos Bellos, Yolo Yunlong Tang, Qianxiang Shen, Jing Bi, Luchuan Song, Zeliang Zhang, Jason Corso, and Chenliang Xu

  31. [31]

    Omni-Judge: Can Omni-LLMs Serve as Human-Aligned Judges for Text- Conditioned Audio-Video Generation?arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.01623(2026)

    work page arXiv 2026

  32. [32]

    Haohe Liu, Zehua Chen, Yi Yuan, Xinhao Mei, Xubo Liu, Danilo Mandic, Wenwu Wang, and Mark Plumbley. 2023. AudioLDM: Text-to-Audio Generation with Latent Diffusion Models. InProceedings of the 40th International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR 2023, Vol. 202. International Machine Learning Society (IMLS), 21450–21474

    2023

  33. [33]

    Huadai Liu, Kaicheng Luo, Jialei Wang, Wen Wang, Qian Chen, Zhou Zhao, and Wei Xue. [n. d.]. ThinkSound: Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Multimodal LLMs for Audio Generation and Editing. InThe Thirty-ninth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems

  34. [34]

    Yaofang Liu, Xiaodong Cun, Xuebo Liu, Xintao Wang, Yong Zhang, Haoxin Chen, Yang Liu, Tieyong Zeng, Raymond Chan, and Ying Shan. 2024. Evalcrafter: Benchmarking and evaluating large video generation models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 22139–22149

    2024

  35. [35]

    Simian Luo, Chuanhao Yan, Chenxu Hu, and Hang Zhao. 2023. Diff-foley: Synchronized video-to-audio synthesis with latent diffusion models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems36 (2023), 48855–48876

    2023

  36. [36]

    Jan Melechovsky, Zixun Guo, Deepanway Ghosal, Navonil Majumder, Dorien Herremans, and Soujanya Poria. 2024. Mustango: Toward controllable text-to- music generation. InProceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Tech- nologies (Volume 1: Long Papers). 8293–8316

    2024

  37. [37]

    Juan F Montesinos, Venkatesh S Kadandale, and Gloria Haro. 2021. A cappella: Audio-visual singing voice separation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.09946(2021)

    work page arXiv 2021

  38. [38]

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sand- hini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al

  39. [39]

    In International conference on machine learning

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision. In International conference on machine learning. PmLR, 8748–8763

  40. [40]

    Dominik Roblek, Kevin Kilgour, Matt Sharifi, and Mauricio Zuluaga. 2019. Fr\’echet Audio Distance: A Reference-free Metric for Evaluating Music En- hancement Algorithms. InProc. Interspeech. 2350–2354. 9

    2019

  41. [41]

    Tim Salimans, Ian Goodfellow, Wojciech Zaremba, Vicki Cheung, Alec Radford, and Xi Chen. 2016. Improved techniques for training gans.Advances in neural information processing systems29 (2016)

    2016

  42. [42]

    Sizhe Shan, Qiulin Li, Yutao Cui, Miles Yang, Yuehai Wang, Qun Yang, Jin Zhou, and Zhao Zhong. 2025. Hunyuanvideo-foley: Multimodal diffusion with rep- resentation alignment for high-fidelity foley audio generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.16930(2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    Roy Sheffer and Yossi Adi. 2023. I hear your true colors: Image guided audio gen- eration. InICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 1–5

    2023

  44. [44]

    Guangzhi Sun, Wenyi Yu, Changli Tang, Xianzhao Chen, Tian Tan, Wei Li, Lu Lu, Zejun Ma, Yuxuan Wang, and Chao Zhang. 2024. video-SALMONN: speech-enhanced audio-visual large language models. InProceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning. 47198–47217

    2024

  45. [45]

    Cees H Taal, Richard C Hendriks, Richard Heusdens, and Jesper Jensen. 2011. An algorithm for intelligibility prediction of time–frequency weighted noisy speech.IEEE Transactions on audio, speech, and language processing19, 7 (2011), 2125–2136

    2011

  46. [46]

    Yuxun Tang, Lan Liu, Wenhao Feng, Yiwen Zhao, Jionghao Han, Yifeng Yu, Jiatong Shi, and Qin Jin. 2025. SingMOS-Pro: An Comprehensive Benchmark for Singing Quality Assessment.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.01812(2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    Sida Tian, Can Zhang, Wei Yuan, Wei Tan, and Wenjie Zhu. 2025. Xmusic: Towards a generalized and controllable symbolic music generation framework. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia27 (2025), 6857–6871

    2025

  48. [48]

    Zeyue Tian, Yizhu Jin, Zhaoyang Liu, Ruibin Yuan, Xu Tan, Qifeng Chen, Wei Xue, and Yike Guo. 2025. Audiox: Diffusion transformer for anything-to-audio generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.10522(2025)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  49. [49]

    Zeyue Tian, Zhaoyang Liu, Ruibin Yuan, Jiahao Pan, Qifeng Liu, Xu Tan, Qifeng Chen, Wei Xue, and Yike Guo. 2025. Vidmuse: A simple video-to-music genera- tion framework with long-short-term modeling. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference. 18782–18793

    2025

  50. [50]

    Andros Tjandra, Yi-Chiao Wu, Baishan Guo, John Hoffman, Brian Ellis, Apoorv Vyas, Bowen Shi, Sanyuan Chen, Matt Le, Nick Zacharov, et al . 2025. Meta audiobox aesthetics: Unified automatic quality assessment for speech, music, and sound.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.05139(2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  51. [51]

    Ilpo Viertola, Vladimir Iashin, and Esa Rahtu. 2025. Temporally aligned audio for video with autoregression. InICASSP 2025-2025 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 1–5

    2025

  52. [52]

    Hui Wang, Cheng Liu, Junyang Chen, Haoze Liu, Yuhang Jia, Shiwan Zhao, Jiaming Zhou, Haoqin Sun, Hui Bu, and Yong Qin. 2026. Tta-bench: A compre- hensive benchmark for evaluating text-to-audio models. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 40. 33512–33520

    2026

  53. [53]

    Heng Wang, Jianbo Ma, Santiago Pascual, Richard Cartwright, and Weidong Cai. 2024. V2a-mapper: A lightweight solution for vision-to-audio generation by connecting foundation models. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 38. 15492–15501

    2024

  54. [54]

    Jun Wang, Xijuan Zeng, Chunyu Qiang, Ruilong Chen, Shiyao Wang, Le Wang, Wangjing Zhou, Pengfei Cai, Jiahui Zhao, Nan Li, et al. 2025. Kling-foley: Multi- modal diffusion transformer for high-quality video-to-audio generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.19774(2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    Le Wang, Jun Wang, Chunyu Qiang, Feng Deng, Chen Zhang, Di Zhang, and Kun Gai. 2025. Audiogen-omni: A unified multimodal diffusion transformer for video- synchronized audio, speech, and song generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.00733 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    Yongqi Wang, Wenxiang Guo, Rongjie Huang, Jiawei Huang, Zehan Wang, Fuming You, Ruiqi Li, and Zhou Zhao. 2024. Frieren: Efficient video-to-audio generation network with rectified flow matching.Advances in neural information processing systems37 (2024), 128118–128138

    2024

  57. [57]

    Zehan Wang, Ke Lei, Chen Zhu, Jiawei Huang, Sashuai Zhou, Luping Liu, Xize Cheng, Shengpeng Ji, Zhenhui Ye, Tao Jin, et al. 2025. T2A-Feedback: Improving Basic Capabilities of Text-to-Audio Generation via Fine-grained AI Feedback. InProceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 23535–23547

    2025

  58. [58]

    Zehan Wang, Ziang Zhang, Xize Cheng, Rongjie Huang, Luping Liu, Zhenhui Ye, Haifeng Huang, Yang Zhao, Tao Jin, Peng Gao, et al. 2024. FreeBind: free lunch in unified multimodal space via knowledge fusion. InProceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning. 52233–52246

    2024

  59. [59]

    Shih-Lun Wu and Yi-Hsuan Yang. 2020. The jazz transformer on the front line: Exploring the shortcomings of ai-composed music through quantitative measures.arXiv preprint arXiv:2008.01307(2020)

    work page arXiv 2020

  60. [60]

    Yusong Wu, Ke Chen, Tianyu Zhang, Yuchen Hui, Taylor Berg-Kirkpatrick, and Shlomo Dubnov. 2023. Large-scale contrastive language-audio pretraining with feature fusion and keyword-to-caption augmentation. InICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 1–5

    2023

  61. [61]

    Zhifeng Xie, Shengye Yu, Qile He, and Mengtian Li. 2024. Sonicvisionlm: Playing sound with vision language models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 26866–26875

    2024

  62. [62]

    Yazhou Xing, Yingqing He, Zeyue Tian, Xintao Wang, and Qifeng Chen. 2024. Seeing and hearing: Open-domain visual-audio generation with diffusion latent aligners. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 7151–7161

    2024

  63. [63]

    Jin Xu, Zhifang Guo, Hangrui Hu, Yunfei Chu, Xiong Wang, Jinzheng He, Yuxuan Wang, Xian Shi, Ting He, Xinfa Zhu, et al. 2025. Qwen3-omni technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.17765(2025)

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    Xuenan Xu, Jiahao Mei, Zihao Zheng, Ye Tao, Zeyu Xie, Yaoyun Zhang, Haohe Liu, Yuning Wu, Ming Yan, Wen Wu, et al. 2025. Uniflow-audio: Unified flow matching for audio generation from omni-modalities.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.24391 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    Dongchao Yang, Jianwei Yu, Helin Wang, Wen Wang, Chao Weng, Yuexian Zou, and Dong Yu. 2023. Diffsound: Discrete diffusion model for text-to-sound generation.IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing 31 (2023), 1720–1733

    2023

  66. [66]

    Geng Yang, Shan Yang, Kai Liu, Peng Fang, Wei Chen, and Lei Xie. 2021. Multi- band melgan: Faster waveform generation for high-quality text-to-speech. In 2021 IEEE Spoken Language Technology Workshop (SLT). IEEE, 492–498

    2021

  67. [67]

    Yochai Yemini, Aviv Shamsian, Lior Bracha, Sharon Gannot, and Ethan Fetaya. [n. d.]. LipVoicer: Generating Speech from Silent Videos Guided by Lip Reading. InThe Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations

  68. [68]

    Ryandhimas E Zezario, Szu-Wei Fu, Chiou-Shann Fuh, Yu Tsao, and Hsin-Min Wang. 2020. STOI-Net: A deep learning based non-intrusive speech intelligi- bility assessment model. In2020 Asia-Pacific Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference (APSIPA ASC). IEEE, 482–486

    2020

  69. [69]

    Hang Zhang, Xin Li, and Lidong Bing. 2023. Video-llama: An instruction-tuned audio-visual language model for video understanding. InProceedings of the 2023 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing: system demonstrations. 543–553

    2023

  70. [70]

    Liqian Zhang and Magdalena Fuentes. 2025. Sonique: Video background music generation using unpaired audio-visual data. InICASSP 2025-2025 IEEE Inter- national Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 1–5

    2025

  71. [71]

    Yiming Zhang, Yicheng Gu, Yanhong Zeng, Zhening Xing, Yuancheng Wang, Zhizheng Wu, Bin Liu, and Kai Chen. 2026. Foleycrafter: Bring silent videos to life with lifelike and synchronized sounds.International Journal of Computer Vision134, 1 (2026), 46

    2026

  72. [72]

    Yipin Zhou, Zhaowen Wang, Chen Fang, Trung Bui, and Tamara L Berg. 2018. Visual to sound: Generating natural sound for videos in the wild. InProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 3550–3558

    2018

  73. [73]

    Zitang Zhou, Ke Mei, Yu Lu, Tianyi Wang, and Fengyun Rao. 2025. Harmonyset: A comprehensive dataset for understanding video-music semantic alignment and temporal synchronization. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference. 3152–3162

    2025

  74. [74]

    Alon Ziv, Itai Gat, Gael Le Lan, Tal Remez, Felix Kreuk, Jade Copet, Alexandre Défossez, Gabriel Synnaeve, and Yossi Adi. [n. d.]. Masked Audio Generation using a Single Non-Autoregressive Transformer. InThe Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations

  75. [75]

    Heda Zuo, Weitao You, Junxian Wu, Shihong Ren, Pei Chen, Mingxu Zhou, Yujia Lu, and Lingyun Sun. 2025. Gvmgen: A general video-to-music generation model with hierarchical attentions. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 39. 23099–23107

    2025

  76. [76]

    The video shows,

    Daniil Zverev, Thaddäus Wiedemer, Ameya Prabhu, Matthias Bethge, Wieland Brendel, and A Koepke. 2025. Vggsounder: Audio-visual evaluations for founda- tion models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision. 1027–1037. 10 A VidAudio-Bench Construction To support reliable evaluation of V2A and VT2A systems, we con- struct sub...

    2025

  77. [80]

    # Step 2: Acoustic Analysis (Audio Only) Estimate:

    age confidence [0.0-1.0] Use only visual cues such as face structure, skin appearance, hair, lip movement, overall visible age impression, and other observable appearance cues. # Step 2: Acoustic Analysis (Audio Only) Estimate:

  78. [81]

    apparent gender presentation [male-presenting / female-presenting / ambiguous]

  79. [82]

    apparent age group [Child (0–12), Teenage (13–17), Adult (18–59), Senior (60+)]

  80. [83]

    gender confidence [0.0-1.0]

Showing first 80 references.