mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Clean Accuracy Does Not Guarantee Provenance Robustness: A Prospective Codec-Stress Evaluation of Audio Attribution

arXiv 2609.07981 ↗First posted 7 Sep 2026cs.SD cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Audio provenance attribution - which system produced a synthetic utterance - is reported at near-ceiling accuracy on clean benchmarks, yet audio reaching an analyst has usually been transcoded. We report a prospectively registered measurement of closed-set attribution after single-stage codec transport, with the analysis region fixed from fidelity metadata before any attribution model was trained. On two corpora, in-support losses reach 53.5 [43.5, 63.6] and 70.3 [63.0, 77.5] Macro-F1 points for WavLM-Base+, and 61.0 [56.8, 65.1] and 49.8 [41.6, 57.9] for W2V2-BERT 2.0, under simultaneous component-level bands. Degradation is strongly condition- and representation-dependent: within one in-support grid WavLM losses run from -0.4 to +53.5 points, and the two encoders differ beyond a prespecified +/-5-point margin at six of twelve conditions. A clean-qualified ECAPA-TDNN and a Proxy-Anchor head degrade comparably, so the effect is not confined to one representation family or a weak linear head. The registered matched-fidelity comparison was not estimable on this grid, and waveform and perceptual measures order the conditions differently: MP3 at 8 kbit/s ranks mid-grid on SI-SDR but last on PESQ-WB while causing the largest loss. For the tested tasks, corpora, representations and codec grid, a clean accuracy figure does not by itself characterise deployment robustness.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Sep 2026.

Builds on

22 of 24 references.

References · 22

  1. 2022High Fidelity Neural Audio Compressioncited by 687
  2. 2023High-Fidelity Audio Compression with Improved RVQGANcited by 431
  3. 2024MLAAD: The Multi-Language Audio Anti-Spoofing Datasetcited by 56
  4. 2021A Study On Data Augmentation In Voice Anti-Spoofingcited by 18
  5. 2023The Impact of Silence on Speech Anti-Spoofingcited by 13
  6. 2025CodecFake+: Codec-Based Resynthesized Data as a Proxy for Detecting CodecFake Speechcited by 6
  7. 2025Codec-Based Deepfake Source Tracing via Neural Audio Codec Taxonomycited by 6
  8. 2025STOPA: A Database of Systematic VariaTion Of DeePfake Audio for Open-Set Source Tracing and Attributioncited by 6
  9. 2020Dataset artefacts in anti-spoofing systems: a case study on the ASVspoof 2017 benchmarkcited by 5
  10. 2025Open-Set Source Tracing of Audio Deepfake Systemscited by 4
  11. 2022Forensic Analysis and Localization of Multiply Compressed MP3 Audio Using Transformerscited by 3
  12. 2024Lightweight Model Attribution and Detection of Synthetic Speech via Audio Residual Fingerprintscited by 3
10 more
  1. 2025Probing the Robustness Properties of Neural Speech Codecscited by 3
  2. 2026AFSS: Artifact-Focused Self-Synthesis for Mitigating Bias in Audio Deepfake Detectioncited by 3
  3. 2025Measuring the Robustness of Audio Deepfake Detection under Real-World Corruptioncited by 2
  4. 2025Perturbed Public Voices (P2V): A Dataset for Robust Audio Deepfake Detectioncited by 2
  5. 2025Towards Neural Audio Codec Source Parsingcited by 1
  6. 2026ML-ITW: A Multilingual in-the-wild Benchmark for Speech Deepfake Detectioncited by 1
  7. 2026Neural Encoding Detection is Not All You Need for Synthetic Speech Detectioncited by 1
  8. 2026Anchoring the Unknown: Open-Set Model Attribution via Proxy-Anchor Learningcited by 1
  9. 2026Open-Set Source Tracing as Compositional Factors via Structured Prototypescited by 1
  10. 2026Language-Statistical Analysis of Neural Audio Codec Tokens Across Architectures, Corpora, and Noise Conditionscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.