Mind the Gap! Static and Interactive Evaluations of Large Audio Models
Abstract
As AI chatbots become ubiquitous, voice interaction presents a compelling way to enable rapid, high-bandwidth communication for both semantic and social signals. This has driven research into Large Audio Models (LAMs) to power voice-native experiences. However, aligning LAM development with user goals requires a clear understanding of user needs and preferences to establish reliable progress metrics. This study addresses these challenges by introducing an interactive approach to evaluate LAMs and collecting 7,500 LAM interactions from 484 participants. Through topic modeling of user queries, we identify primary use cases for audio interfaces. We then analyze user preference rankings and qualitative feedback to determine which models best align with user needs. Finally, we evaluate how static benchmarks predict interactive performance - our analysis reveals no individual benchmark strongly correlates with interactive results (tau leq 0.33 for all benchmarks). While combining multiple coarse-grained features yields modest predictive power (R^2=0.30), only two out of twenty datasets on spoken question answering and age prediction show significantly positive correlations. This suggests a clear need to develop LAM evaluations that better correlate with user preferences.
Community
Voice apps like GPT-4o Advanced Voice or Gemini Live add exciting new ways to chat with AI. To build better Large Audio Models (LAMs), we need to understand how people actually use them.
We recruited 484 ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude users and asked them to compare 5 LAMs anonymously. Across 7,500 voice-in, text-out interactions, we found that users primarily indicate preferences according to the basic ability to understand and follow spoken instructions and the overall style of text responses. Unlike in text-only LLMs, performing well on existing speech benchmarks didn't predict which LAMs users preferred. This suggests we need new benchmarks focused on practical voice tasks rather than detecting speaker traits and emotional cues which make up a significant number of tasks in existing aggregated speech benchmarks!
Try out the top LAMs yourself at TalkArena.org!
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- Do LLMs Recognize Your Preferences? Evaluating Personalized Preference Following in LLMs (2025)
- Toward Metaphor-Fluid Conversation Design for Voice User Interfaces (2025)
- CarMem: Enhancing Long-Term Memory in LLM Voice Assistants through Category-Bounding (2025)
- Large Language Models as Evaluators for Conversational Recommender Systems: Benchmarking System Performance from a User-Centric Perspective (2025)
- InterFeedback: Unveiling Interactive Intelligence of Large Multimodal Models via Human Feedback (2025)
- Bridging HCI and AI Research for the Evaluation of Conversational SE Assistants (2025)
- SDPO: Segment-Level Direct Preference Optimization for Social Agents (2025)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment:
@librarian-bot
recommend
Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper