Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Text Dominance in Paralinguistic Conflict: Tracing Suppression Through Audio LLM Circuits

Audio LLMs deployed in settings such as crisis hotlines and customer support are only useful beyond speech-to-text pipelines if they use acoustic cues rather than the transcript alone. We test whether they prioritise transcript content over paralinguistic cues (emotion, speaker identity, sarcasm) and trace the mechanism when they do. Across six audio LLMs under LISTEN-style conflict conditions, the mean text-dominance rate on mismatched text+audio items is 0.78 (0.86 excluding sarcasm). In the most text-dominant screened model, probing shows speaker identity remains linearly decodable at ceiling at the language model's input, so the failure is not perceptual. Back-patching, reported to re...

AuthorsAnkur Banerjee, Vishnu Guntakala, Danity Pike et al.
Primary categorycs.LG
Published19 October 2026
Last updated at source19 October 2026
cs.LGcs.CL
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/db9ea595-926a-482d-a2c0-5c2c5ef298ef" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Popularity, last 4 days

0 now. Counts as reported by the source, snapshotted daily by Silytics.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 23 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.