Abstract
Long-form audio performance is often summarized by context length and aggregate accuracy, obscuring how language, evidence, and task jointly shape difficulty. We introduce MuLA-Bench: 5,038 open-ended questions over 1,769 in-the-wild recordings totaling 1,377.9 hours, covering 16 languages and eight domains. A balanced Language x Domain semantic track supports controlled comparisons, while a complementary acoustic track preserves naturally occurring non-speech evidence. Evidence-grounded generation, shortcut checks, and language-expert review provide auditable questions without translating a shared source set or injecting target sounds. We evaluate ten audio-language models and conduct pooled diagnostics on a fixed eight-model cohort. Language rankings change across domains and tasks; acoustic-semantic performance gaps vary with the requested operation; and temporal errors can persist after the correct event is identified. Long-range retrieval is comparatively strong, while precise clock alignment and factual grounding of natural acoustic events remain fragile. MuLA-Bench thus exposes conditional failure patterns that a single long-context score does not capture.
Abstract (translated)
URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.23416
