(cid:55)
(cid:51)
(cid:51)
(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:55)

(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:51)
(cid:55)
(cid:51)
(cid:55)
(cid:55)

(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:51)
(cid:51)
(cid:51)
(cid:51)

(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:55)
(cid:51)

FD ↓

KL ↓

FAD ↓

AudioLDM TANGO AudioLDM TANGO AudioLDM TANGO
2.13
4.62
5.19
5.15
3.40
3.89
3.18
9.26

38.15
78.62
61.91
51.61
35.60
55.06
37.57
54.25

34.06
77.78
70.32
57.75
33.13
42.00
39.22
52.77

2.81
4.28
6.32
6.75
5.42
6.57
3.26
11.49

1.01
1.82
0.89
1.89
1.35
1.46
1.11
1.43

0.99
1.92
1.29
1.96
1.43
1.12
1.34
1.33

some, and AudioLDM in others. However, TANGO achieves better FAD scores in all but one group,
with large improvements in (human, animal), (natural), (things), and (natural, things) categories.

4 Related Works
Text-to-Audio Generation using Instruction-Tuned LLM and Latent Diffusion Model