Large Audio-Language Models (ALMs) have recently demonstrated remarkable capabilities in holistic audio understanding, yet they remain unreliable for temporal grounding, i.e., the task of pinpointing exactly when an event occurs within long-form audio. This limitation stems from two factors: training data dominated by clip-level supervision lacking precise timestamps, and benchmarks that fail to simulate real-world scenarios where short events are obscured by dense background sounds. In this paper, we introduce SpotSound, an audio language model designed for grounding audio events. SpotSound incorporates a novel training objective, specifically designed to suppress hallucinated timestamps for events absent from the input. Additionally, we present SpotSound-Bench, a challenging temporal grounding benchmark where target events occupy less than ~10% of each clip, creating a rigorous 'needle-in-a-haystack' evaluation. Experiments demonstrate that SpotSound achieves state-of-the-art results on temporal grounding benchmarks while maintaining robust performance across general downstream audio-language tasks. Code, models and benchmark are released on https://loiesun.github.io/spotsound/
Figures & tables
Figure 1. Qualitative examples and performance comparison. (a) SpotSound accurately grounds timestamps relevant to the query. (b) SpotSound identifies sound events described in the query that are absent from the audio. (c) Quantitative comparison; blue denotes SpotSound , and red denotes previous top-tier models. We evaluate models on four benchmarks and report the mIoU and [email protected] for each.
Figure 2. Model architecture and dataset generation pipeline. (a) In SpotSound , we construct an interleaved sequence of timestamps and audio tokens and concatenate with a language query, and feed it to the LLM to predict the target temporal interval. (b) We employ LLMs to generate captions for foreground audio, then randomly mix foreground and background sounds to synthesise the final audio, preserving the insertion timestamp as ground-truth.
Datasets
A_num
Q_num
Anno.
DUR.
Q_type
AudioGrounding
3,770
8,935
M.
10s
Cap.
Clotho-Moment
32,694
32,694
A.
60s
Cap.
UnAV-100
5,686
9,115
M.
43s
Label
ASSL
5,000
16,896
M.
10s
Label
Ours
10,000
10,000
A.
50s
Cap.
Table 1. Statistics of the training set. ‘A_num’ and ‘Q_num’ denote the total number of audio clips and queries, respectively. ‘Anno’, ‘DUR’, and ‘Q_type’ represent the annotation method, average duration, and query type. Under annotation, ‘M.’ indicates manual annotation, while ‘A.’ indicates automatic annotation. Under query type, ‘Cap.’ indicates caption.
Models
A_num
Q_num
DUR.
W_len
Q_type
AudioGrounding
70
100
10s
2.6s
Cap.
Clotho-Moment
6,649
6,649
60s
19.6s
Cap.
UnAV-100 subset
492
997
42.4s
14.6s
Cap.
SpotSound-Bench
400
400
54.2s
3.9s
Label
Table 2. Benchmark statistics. ‘A_num’ and ‘Q_num’ denote the total number of audio clips and queries, respectively. ‘DUR’, ‘W_len’ and ‘Q_type’ represent the average duration, average window length and query type. Under query type, ‘Cap.’ indicates caption.
Table 3. Audio temporal grounding results. mIoU represents the mean IoU. [email protected] and [email protected] denote Recall@1 across IoU thresholds of 0.3 and 0.5, respectively. SpotSound-Q and SpotSound-A denotes the integration of the SpotSound method with Qwen2 Audio and Audio Flamingo 3, respectively. Best results are in bold, and second-best are underlined .
Figure 3. Qualitative comparison with other large audio-language models. (a) Example cases from the SpotSound-Bench , illustrating the temporal windows predicted by each model in response to the textual query. (b) Examples drawn from the Clotho-Moment, demonstrating cases where the models identify the non-existent sound events.
Models
Clotho-Moment
AudioGrounding
Pos.
Neg.
Pos.
Neg.
Kimi-Audio
54.8
65.2
54.5
60.7
TimeAudio
/
/
/
/
Qwen2-Audio
72.2
43.1
57.6
55.1
SpotSound-Q
87.6
85.8
93.2
80.7
Audio Flamingo 3
65.6
70.3
89.1
76.0
Table 4. Hallucinations for non-existent events evaluated in accuracy. ‘Pos.’ and ‘Neg.’ refer to the model prediction accuracy of positive and negative queries, respectively. ‘/’ denotes model hallucination, indicating the model is unable to determine whether the events in the query are present in the audio. Best results are in bold.
Models
Clotho.
UnAV.
Spot.
Audio.
Kimi-Audio
0.5
4.2
1.6
3.4
TimeAudio
/
/
/
/
Qwen2-Audio
5.4
11.1
3.4
41.6
SpotSound-Q
92.0
89.7
72.4
81.6
Audio Flamingo 3
30.4
42.4
21.2
69.2
SpotSound-A
91.4
84.9
82.9
85.6
Table 5. Two-stage joint assessment results evaluated in F1-score. ‘Clotho.’, ‘UnAV.’, ‘Spot.’ and ‘Audio.’ refer to Clotho-Moment, Unav-100 subset, SpotSound-Bench and AudioGrounding, respectively. Best results are in bold.
Table 6. Performance on sound event detection. Best results are in bold.
Models
Clotho.
UnAV.
Spot.
Audio.
Qwen2-Audio
5.7
9.7
4.4
37.0
(+) FT
59.2
50.7
23.8
62.5
(+) unlock
68.5
59.7
34.4
63.1
(+) timestamps
85.4
72.4
49.9
67.8
Audio Flamingo 3
22.6
25.0
7.6
47.5
(+) FT
82.8
52.7
37.4
60.3
Table 7. Ablation on different modules evaluated in mIoU. ‘Clotho.’, ‘UnAV.’, ‘Spot.’ and ‘Audio.’ refer to Clotho-Moment, Unav-100 subset, SpotSound-Bench and AudioGrounding, respectively. ‘(+) FT’ denotes the standard fine-tuned version of baselines, ‘(+) unlock’ denotes the Qwen2-Audio without the 30-second encoder limitation. Best results are in bold.
Settings
Clotho.
UnAV.
Spot.
Audio.
Granularity of Timestamps
0.2s
85.8
69.7
57.2
72.7
1s
85.6
69.8
57.9
70.3
2s
87.2
69.6
56.5
69.7
Quantity of ASSL and Synthetic Data
5k&10k
85.6
69.8
57.9
70.3
Table 8. Ablation results of hyperparameters evaluated in mIoU. The experiments are based on SpotSound-A . ‘Clotho.’, ‘UnAV.’, ‘Spot.’ and ‘Audio.’ refer to Clotho-Moment, Unav-100 subset, SpotSound-Bench and AudioGrounding, respectively. Settings in our experiments are in bold.
Appendix figures & tables9 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure S1 . Category distributions for the synthetic dataset.
Figure S2 . Duration and window length distributions for SpotSound-Bench .
Settings
Clotho.
UnAV.
Spot.
Audio.
Granularity of Timestamps
0.2s
82.6
69.9
42.3
61.2
1s
85.4
72.4
46.6
67.8
2s
81.5
70.1
38.7
60.5
Quantity of ASSL and Synthetic Data
5k:10k
85.4
72.4
46.6
67.8
Appendix
Table S1 . Ablation Results of Hyperparameters. ‘Clotho.’, ‘UnAV.’, ‘Spot.’ and ‘Audio.’ refer to Clotho-Moment, Unav-100 subset. Settings in our experiments are in bold.
Load Model
Inference (1 Sample)
SpotSound-A
7.6s
1.0s
SpotSound-A - 0.2s
7.5s
1.4s
SpotSound-A - 2s
7.6s
1.0s
Appendix
Table S2 . Latency in Inference Process. Settings in our experiments are in bold.
Table S3 . Robustness test results. ‘Target’ and denotes randomly shifting the target sound event window. Settings in our experiments are in bold.
Models
SpotSound-Bench
UnAV-100 subset
Pos.
Neg.
Pos.
Neg.
Kimi-Audio
51.8
60.5
50.0
41.0
TimeAudio
/
/
/
/
Qwen2-Audio
55.5
78.0
64.0
44.0
SpotSound-Q
85.3
88.3
93.0
96.0
Audio Flamingo 3
85.5
95.0
80.0
92.0
Appendix
Table S4 . Hallucinations for non-existent events evaluated in accuracy. ‘Pos.’ and ‘Neg.’ refer to the model prediction accuracy of positive and negative queries, respectively. ‘/’ denotes model hallucination, indicating the model is unable to determine whether the events in the query are present in the audio. Best results are in bold.
Figure S3 . Success and failure cases from SpotSound-Bench .
Figure S4 . Success and failure cases from AudioGrounding.
Figure S5 . Success and failure cases from UnAV-100 subset.
Large Audio-Language Models (LALMs) have substantially advanced general audio understanding, yet they remain limited in fine-grained temporal perception, particularly in precise event localization. Existing approaches primarily post-train LALMs to predict event boundaries as timestamp tokens. However, this generative formulation lacks explicit correspondence between the timestamp predictions and fine-grained acoustic evidence, limiting the precision and reliability of temporal localization. To address this issue, we augment the LALM with a dedicated frame-level grounding model while leveraging its semantic modeling capability to represent the event query. Specifically, the frozen LALM encodes the event query with audio as context, and the grounding model combines these query representations with fine-grained audio features to localize the target event at the frame level. Extensive experiments across diverse temporal grounding benchmarks demonstrate strong and consistent improvements over existing methods. Further evaluation shows that the grounding model can provide temporal evidence to support downstream reasoning.
Yanfeng Shi, Yan Song, Junhui Li +4
National Engineering Research Center of Speech and Language Information Processing, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China · ICT Cluster, Singapore Institute of Technology, Singapore
Temporal grounding is fundamental to audio understanding, yet large audio language models (LALMs) remain weak at it on long audio, where hallucinations compound and annotated data is scarce. Existing benchmarks cover only short clips or offer coarse, synthetic annotations. We introduce EgoSCAPE, a manually verified benchmark created from Ego4D with 700 real audios of durations up to 5 minutes, annotated with dense captions, sound sources, audio timelines, and temporal grounding queries. We further propose ATTEST, a GRPO-based reinforcement learning framework that improves temporal grounding without changing the base model's architecture or token vocabulary. ATTEST combines (i) a counterfactual grounding reward penalizing predictions that survive removal of their acoustic evidence, (ii) an attention-density reward encouraging generation to attend to its own claimed time spans, and (iii) token-wise advantages giving segment-level credit for long dense captions. ATTEST outperforms prior temporal grounding methods on existing dense captioning and grounding benchmarks, with fewer hallucinations. Together, EgoSCAPE and ATTEST establish a rigorous evaluation-training recipe that brings temporally grounded audio understanding closer to practical, long-form deployment.
Ashutosh Chaubey, Jinxi Guo, Minh Tran +2
Meta Superintelligence Labs · University of Southern California
Large audio-language models (LALMs) describe audio at the clip level but cannot assign timestamps to the events, speakers, or sounds they identify. Despite being essential for downstream tasks like speech recognition and dense audio captioning, timestamping remains a key limitation of most LALMs. We present TEMPO (Temporally-grounded Multi-task Post-training), the first unified model to handle audio, speech, and music timestamping tasks. Our core contribution is a supervised fine-tuning (SFT) stage built on three innovations: atomic timestamp tokens, a time-aware projector that injects sinusoidal wall-clock encodings into audio frame embeddings, and a distance-aware Gaussian loss. Our training is based on a synthetic-to-real curriculum. We further introduce, to our knowledge, the first application of reinforcement learning to unified audio timestamping, using GRPO with verifiable temporal rewards that directly optimize the evaluation objectives. Rather than serving as the primary source of performance gains, GRPO acts as a refinement stage on top of the SFT checkpoint, providing modest additional improvements. To support this work, we build a training dataset containing 119K samples and an evaluation benchmark containing 10K samples, drawn from established corpora across five tasks. On this benchmark, TEMPO outperforms Audio Flamingo Next and Qwen3-Omni, two state-of-the-art LALMs explicitly trained on timestamped data. Experiments confirm that SFT delivers most of these gains, with GRPO providing consistent but moderate refinements.