mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

PAM: Prompting Audio-Language Models for Audio Quality Assessment

arXiv 2402.00282 ↗First posted 1 Feb 2024eess.AS cs.SDcited by 20

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

While audio quality is a key performance metric for various audio processing tasks, including generative modeling, its objective measurement remains a challenge. Audio-Language Models (ALMs) are pre-trained on audio-text pairs that may contain information about audio quality, the presence of artifacts, or noise. Given an audio input and a text prompt related to quality, an ALM can be used to calculate a similarity score between the two. Here, we exploit this capability and introduce PAM, a no-reference metric for assessing audio quality for different audio processing tasks. Contrary to other "reference-free" metrics, PAM does not require computing embeddings on a reference dataset nor training a task-specific model on a costly set of human listening scores. We extensively evaluate the reliability of PAM against established metrics and human listening scores on four tasks: text-to-audio (TTA), text-to-music generation (TTM), text-to-speech (TTS), and deep noise suppression (DNS). We perform multiple ablation studies with controlled distortions, in-the-wild setups, and prompt choices. Our evaluation shows that PAM correlates well with existing metrics and human listening scores. These results demonstrate the potential of ALMs for computing a general-purpose audio quality metric.

Key facts. Cited by 20 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 1 Feb 2024.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 4; 2025: 5; 2026: 11.

20 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2024A Comprehensive Survey of Hallucination in Large Language, Image, Video and Audio Foundation Modelscited by 98
  2. 2024Video-to-Audio Generation with Hidden Alignmentcited by 26
  3. 2025AudioJudge: Understanding What Works in Large Audio Model Based Speech Evaluationcited by 20
  4. 2024Enabling Auditory Large Language Models for Automatic Speech Quality Evaluationcited by 13
  5. 2026AQAScore: Evaluating Semantic Alignment in Text-to-Audio Generation via Audio Question Answeringcited by 8
  6. 2024Multimodal Music Generation with Explicit Bridges and Retrieval Augmentationcited by 6
  7. 2026MuQ-Eval: An Open-Source Per-Sample Quality Metric for AI Music Generation Evaluationcited by 6
  8. 2026CMI-RewardBench: Evaluating Music Reward Models with Compositional Multimodal Instructioncited by 5
  9. 2025AGAV-Rater: Adapting Large Multimodal Model for AI-Generated Audio-Visual Quality Assessmentcited by 4
  10. 2025From Scores to Preferences: Redefining MOS Benchmarking for Speech Quality Reward Modelingcited by 4
  11. 2026AnyAudio-Judge: A Dynamic Rubric-Based Benchmark and Evaluator for Audio Instruction Followingcited by 3
  12. 2026TuneJury: An Open Metric for Improving Music Generation Preference Alignmentcited by 3
8 more
  1. 2026Scaling Audio-Visual Quality Assessment Dataset via Crowdsourcingcited by 2
  2. 2025DegDiT: Controllable Audio Generation with Dynamic Event Graph Guided Diffusion Transformercited by 1
  3. 2026ImmersiveFlow: Stereo-to-7.1.4 spatial audio generation with flow matchingcited by 1
  4. 2026Probing Low-Level Acoustic Attribute Encoding in CLAP Audio Embeddingscited by 1
  5. 2025MMMOS: Multi-domain Multi-axis Audio Quality Assessmentcited by 0
  6. 2026Robust Generative Audio Quality Assessment: Disentangling Quality from Spurious Correlationscited by 0
  7. 2026CAF-Score: Calibrating CLAP with LALMs for Reference-free Audio Captioning Evaluationcited by 0
  8. 2026MuseCritic: Learning Multi-Aspect Song Rewards through Natural-Language Aesthetic Critiquescited by 0