Listening Between the Frames: Bridging Temporal Gaps in Large Audio-Language Models
Open accessAbstract
Recent Large Audio-Language Models (LALMs) exhibit impressive capabilities in understanding audio content for conversational QA tasks. However, these models struggle to accurately understand timestamps for temporal localization (e.g., Temporal Audio Grounding) and are restricted to short audio perception, leading to constrained capabilities on fine-grained tasks. We identify three key aspects that limit their temporal localization and long audio understanding: (i) timestamp representation, (ii) architecture, and (iii) data. To address this, we introduce TimeAudio, a novel method that empowers LALMs to connect their understanding of audio content with precise temporal perception. Specifically, we incorporate unique temporal markers to improve time-sensitive reasoning and apply an absolute time-aware encoding that explicitly grounds the acoustic features with absolute time information. Moreover, to achieve end-to-end long audio understanding, we introduce a segment-level token merging module to substantially reduce audio token redundancy and enhance the efficiency of information extraction. Due to the lack of suitable datasets and evaluation metrics, we consolidate existing audio datasets into a new dataset focused on temporal tasks and establish a series of metrics to evaluate the fine-grained performance. Evaluations show strong performance across a variety of fine-grained tasks, such as dense captioning, temporal grounding, and timeline speech summarization, demonstrating TimeAudio's robust temporal localization and reasoning capabilities.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Candidate audio captions are verified against ASR annotations for speech regions, TimeAudio outputs, and event metadata, and an LLM-based judge checks scene consistency, vocal activity, event correctness, source entities, acoustic attributes, and temporal coherence.
“To improve reliability, candidate captions are verified against ASR annotations for speech regions, TimeAudio [35] outputs, and event metadata. An LLM-based judge further checks scene consistency, vocal activity, event correctness, source entities, acoustic attributes, and temporal coherence, and decides whether each sample should be kept, revised, or filtered.”
From MOSS-Audio Technical Report (2026) · cites this paper as [35]
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Yang, C., Yu, C., Chen, H., Zhu, J., Chen, J., Chen, K., Wang, W., Wang, Y., Jiang, Y., Jiang, Y., et al. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2606.01802
- Authors
- Wang, H., Li, Y., Ma, S., Liu, H., & Wang, X.
- Affiliations
- Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2025
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 31
- Pages
- 26233-26241
- ISSN
- 2159-5399 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2511.11039
- OpenAlex
- W7138385117
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- AAAI Publications (The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI)) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China
- National Social Science Fund of China
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Music and Audio Processing
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
- Keywords
- large audio language models, temporal grounding, temporal localization, dense captioning, temporal reasoning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review