A Reliability Assessment of LALM Audio Judges for Full-Duplex Voice Agents
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Computation and Language
arXiv:2607.07985 (cs)
[Submitted on 8 Jul 2026]
Title:A Reliability Assessment of LALM Audio Judges for Full-Duplex Voice Agents
View a PDF of the paper titled A Reliability Assessment of LALM Audio Judges for Full-Duplex Voice Agents, by A. Sayyad and 4 other authors
View PDF
HTML (experimental)
Abstract:We report the empirical reliability of Gemini models as audio judges that score full-duplex agent conversations directly from the raw stereo waveform, tested across three models in the Gemini family: 2.5 Flash, 3.5 Flash, and 3.1 Pro. Our primary evidence base uses Gemini 2.5 Flash as the ground-truth model, validated against three calibrated human raters on 209 stereo sessions, scored on 8 production dimensions: 152 full-duplex conversations across 13 accent-and-condition strata, together with 57 adversarial defect-injected clips. The evidence for Gemini 2.5 Flash is consistent across three tests. (i) On 5 of 8 dimensions the LALM-human Spearman rho departs from the pairwise human-human rho by at most 0.07, and on 7 of 8 dimensions the two quantities 95 percent bootstrap confidence intervals overlap. (ii) The LALM agrees with the three-rater human mean within 1 point on 60 to 92 percent of sessions on 6 of 8 dimensions. (iii) On 45 of 48 (defect, dimension) cells the LALM is as sensitive as humans or better under Newcombe-Wilson 95 percent confidence intervals, though most of these are underpowered nulls rather than demonstrated parity. Rank-ordering ability transfers across the Gemini family: 3.5 Flash improves simple agreement to 8 of 8 dimensions, while 3.1 Pro rates several dimensions markedly lower than humans despite comparable rank correlation. A model swap should be re-validated on calibration specifically, not assumed from rank-correlation alone. We identify four areas where deployment requires care, and we estimate that human rating alone for our current evaluation cadence costs roughly two orders of magnitude more than the equivalent LALM workload. The data presented here provides a defensible empirical basis for deploying the LALM as a substitute or fourth rater on the dimensions where the evidence supports it.
| Comments: | 28 pages total (12 main body, 1 reference, 15 appendix). In main body: 2 diagrams, 3 table, 2 charts |
| Subjects: | Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Sound (cs.SD); Audio and Speech Processing (eess.AS) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2607.07985 [cs.CL] |
| (or arXiv:2607.07985v1 [cs.CL] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.07985
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Full-text links:
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
View a PDF of the paper titled A Reliability Assessment of LALM Audio Judges for Full-Duplex Voice Agents, by A. Sayyad and 4 other authors
Current browse context:
cs.CL
References & Citations
Loading...
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos
Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Recommenders and Search Tools
Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language
-
Geometric and Behavioral Stratification in Transformer Residual Streams
Aug 14
-
Perturbation-based Regional Interpretability through Subtraction Mapping (PRISM): naming-error dissociations in language models and post-stroke aphasia
Aug 14
-
I-SDPO: Instance-Level Adaptive Self-Distillation Policy Optimization
Aug 14
-
Comment on "Modeling rapid language learning by distilling Bayesian priors into artificial neural networks"
Aug 14
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.