Rethinking Procedural Audio Pre-training: Source Scaling and Objective Adaptation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Procedural audio has emerged as a viable source for transferable audio representation learning, but its design principles remain unclear.We revisit two questions: how a procedural source should be scaled, and whether training choices developed on natural audio should transfer unchanged to procedural data.Using a controlled source, we separate scale into formula-class coverage C and within-class rendering diversity I.Experiments with FDSL and AudioMAE show that these two forms of scale provide different benefits and depend on the learning formulation and downstream task. A matched AudioMAE study further shows that procedural audio favors low mask ratios (10%--25%), whereas AudioSet-28K favors 50%--75%. Shared-codebook analysis reveals lower patch diversity and stronger temporal predictability in procedural audio. These results motivate source-aware procedural pre-training, where source scaling and learning configuration are considered jointly.Code is available at https://github.com/Cross-Innovation-Lab/Formula-Bank.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 13 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Sep 2026.
Builds on
9 of 13 references.
References · 9
- 2020FSD50K: An Open Dataset of Human-Labeled Sound Eventscited by 342
- 2022Masked Autoencoders that Listencited by 273
- 2021Efficient Training of Audio Transformers with Patchoutcited by 226
- 2021SSAST: Self-Supervised Audio Spectrogram Transformercited by 169
- 2021BYOL for Audio: Self-Supervised Learning for General-Purpose Audio Representationcited by 106
- 2021Pre-training without Natural Imagescited by 100
- 2022MAE-AST: Masked Autoencoding Audio Spectrogram Transformercited by 82
- 2022Masked Spectrogram Prediction For Self-Supervised Audio Pre-Trainingcited by 51
- 2024Pre-training with Synthetic Patterns for Audiocited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.