Full-duplex voice agents must continuously decide when to listen, backchannel, interrupt, handle speech overlaps, take the floor, and yield. Existing benchmarks largely test these behaviors through explicit turn-management instructions, while deployed agents are often configured through roles or personas from which the appropriate conversational behavior must be inferred. We introduce DuplexSpeechBench-IFEval (DSB-IFEval) for evaluating implicit instruction-following in real-time spoken interaction. (DSB-IFEval) comprises 1,038 test cases spanning eight diverse assistant roles and evaluates five conditioning protocols for instruction-following: default behavior, explicit behavioral instructions, persona-implied behavior, combined persona--rule conditioning, and instruction conflict. We measure real-time floor management using a deterministic Instruction Adherence Score (IAS) and persona-consistent content using LLM-judged Persona Adherence Score (PAS). Across six real-time speech systems, we find architecture-dependent trade-offs. Full duplex models like F-Actor and PersonaPlex are more sensitive to whether conversational behavior is stated explicitly or must be inferred from a persona, with adherence dropping by 9.7% and 4.5%, respectively, under persona-only conditioning. In contrast, GPT-Realtime, MiniCPM-o, and Fun-Audio-Chat strongly adhere to persona-consistent content, but their floor behavior does not adapt across explicit and persona-only instructions and remains constrained on several proactive actions. We further find that even if systems reliably follow conflicting directives to their prescribed persona, they still struggle to override them under safety conflict. These results show that inferring the behavior implied by a role, executing it at the appropriate conversational moment, and resolving competing instructions remain distinct challenges for full-duplex voice agents.
Expressive speech systems make a decision before any waveform is rendered: how an utterance is delivered. In dialogue agents, narration, and role-conditioned TTS, that hidden planning step sets affect, pitch, energy, rate, pause, emphasis, and stance, yet downstream audio scores rarely reveal whether those choices were licensed by the source record, a source-use failure that occurs before any waveform exists. VoxReason makes that pre-synthesis decision measurable as a listener-free task for source-grounded speech planning. Before synthesis, VoxReason measures whether delivery choices are grounded in cited source records. Systems output a source-cited speaking-plan with evidence citations, and a deterministic verifier checks citation legality, slot agreement, unsupported state, schema validity, and one-cue counterfactual locality. On 1,440 checked source-label cases, shortcut controls show why slot accuracy alone is unsafe: a key-lookup oracle reaches 1.000 plan-slot accuracy on seen keys, while an emotion prior still reaches 0.958 slot accuracy on source-key-disjoint cases without citing intensity or identity. In a separate 100-case learned source-key-disjoint comparison, a 7B locality SFT+CF repair improves plan-slot accuracy/locality from 0.684/0.141 to 0.919/1.000, and removing source records lowers citation-required grounded score by 0.488. Rendered waveform quality remains outside the present evaluation.
Freeman Jiang, Ramon Sanabria, Soham Deshmukh +16eess.AS cs.CL
Speakers in natural conversation take turns speaking and listening, deciding in real time when to take, hold, or yield the floor. However, turn-taking evaluation remains limited due to the lack of a consistent, linguistically grounded evaluation protocol and hand-annotated data covering diverse conversation types. To address this, we present TurnBench, a multi-domain benchmark that pairs a 30-hour, hand-labeled corpus of dyadic human conversation with a standardized evaluation protocol for end-of-turn and interruption detection. We set conversation type as a controllable experimental variable, covering six distinct interaction styles, and triple-annotate each conversation. Benchmarking 14 heterogeneous turn-taking systems, we find end-of-turn recall stable across types, while interruption false positives are strongly type-dependent and concentrated in backchannel-dense interaction styles. Although in smooth floor transfers human listeners begin speaking a median 151 ms before the current turn ends, no current system performs equivalently without incurring excessive false positives. We release our corpus, a 104-hour training set, and a public leaderboard with an interactive dataset viewer at https://turnbench.sesame.com
Evaluating conversational voice agents at scale re- quires reliable assessment methods that capture both observ- able interaction quality and the contextual judgment typically provided by human evaluators. We investigate LLM-as-a-Judge evaluation by comparing human judgments with GPT-4.1 and GPT-5 on telecom and retail voice-agent conversations, across conversational quality and safety dimensions. The same interac- tions are scored under three evaluation configurations, p0, p1, and p2, to test whether automated judgments are sensitive to the evaluation setup and whether observed patterns generalize across configurations and judge models. Beyond aggregate agreement, we examine metric-level correlations, evaluator consistency, and systematic human-LLM disagreement to identify which conver- sational attributes can be judged reliably by automation and which remain sensitive to interpretation and context. Effective voice-agent evaluation is also shaped by pipeline-level factors such as speech generation, streaming, and error propagation across ASR, reasoning, and tool-calling stages, motivating our focus on comparing how human and LLM judges score the same interactions end to end. Our results show that LLM- based evaluation can serve as an effective component of large- scale voice-agent assessment, but that its reliability is metric- and configuration-dependent rather than uniform. This pro- vides an empirical framework for identifying which metrics suit automated evaluation and supports hybrid pipelines in which LLM judges handle scalable assessment while human evaluators remain engaged for metrics that demand contextual interpretation and higher-confidence judgment.
Speech-to-speech (S2S) voice agents are increasingly being incorporated into enterprise for customer care and as daily companions for consumers owing to the ease of the conversational modality over text. However, existing benchmarks fail to holistically evaluate voice agents along axes that really matter and are shaped as tests of agentic tool calling against a database. We believe they fail to adequately account for the diversity of conversational dialogue that mundane activities introduce and further, never test how faithfully an agent can assist on tasks that move beyond database manipulation. To tackle this DuplexWorld introduces six worlds where voice agents are especially useful: banking, insurance, travel, healthcare and logistics, and Pathfinding. Agents are evaluated on eleven different types of conversations across 156 scenarios (350+ hours of conversation), each testing conversational and analytical capability to varying degrees. Through extensive evaluation comprising agentic, conversational and speech-naturalness metrics, we show that even the best voice agents leave substantial room for improvement on all 3 axes (Pass@1: 0.490, turn-taking: 0.653, DNSMOS: 3.378). We perform extensive analysis on agentic v conversational performance, world- and conversation type-wise performance, failure modes exploring the explore v exploit lens for Pathfinding conversations and voice agent reliability over all six worlds.
Despite significant advances in instruction-following and auditory comprehension, the evaluation of Emotional Intelligence (EI) in Spoken Language Models (SLMs) remains confined to rudimentary paralinguistic perception, lacking a systematic, theory-driven cognitive framework. We introduce EmoSBench, the first comprehensive EI evaluation benchmark for SLMs constructed upon the four-branch theoretical model, covering Perceiving, Understanding, Using, and Managing Emotion across ten sub-tasks. Preliminary assessments on EmoSBench reveal a substantial gap: even leading proprietary models like GPT-4o-Audio achieve only 52.6%, significantly trailing human baselines. To bridge this gap, we develop EmoS, a specialized evaluator model optimized via Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). To facilitate its effective training, we curate EmoDialogue, a bilingual dataset providing necessary fine-grained supervision through response pairs with rigorously defined EI gradations. Concurrently, we introduce a reward mechanism integrating a Steep Exponential Accuracy Reward (SEAR) and a Rationale Fidelity Reward (RFR) to enforce precise ordinal scoring and valid reasoning. Experiments demonstrate that EmoS reaches 83.8% accuracy, approaching human-level performance. Furthermore, evaluations on authentic, unconstrained spoken interactions validate its robust real-world generalization, establishing a foundational framework for advancing emotionally intelligent dialogue systems.
Jinting Wang, Yuguang Yang, Shengyu Li +4cs.SD cs.AI
Text-to-audio (TTA) generation has recently achieved remarkable progress in synthesizing realistic audio from natural language descriptions. However, determining whether generated audio faithfully satisfies complex textual instructions remains challenging. Existing benchmarks mainly rely on global similarity metrics, providing limited insight into fine-grained semantic failures. To address this limitation, we introduce \textbf{AudioScape-TTA}, a structured and complexity-aware benchmark for fine-grained TTA evaluation. AudioScape-TTA represents realistic soundscapes through modality-aware semantic structures and characterizes generation complexity using event density and structural complexity. Based on these annotations, we propose a rubric-based audio-grounded evaluation framework that verifies event realization, acoustic attributes, and speech content through fine-grained semantic criteria. The benchmark contains 2,258 audio-text pairs with 25,707 binary QA rubrics, enabling scalable and interpretable analysis of TTA systems. Experiments on 13 representative open-source TTA models reveal persistent limitations in fine-grained attribute control, speech-content preservation, and compositional soundscape generation. Human validation further demonstrates that our rubric-based evaluation achieves stronger alignment with human semantic judgments than conventional global similarity metrics.
Ali Jafar, Amal Sarmad, Shifa Yousaf +1cs.CL cs.LG
Recent advances in neural text-to-speech (TTS) systems have substantially improved speech naturalness and intelligibility across many languages. However, comprehensive evaluation methodologies that jointly assess perceptual quality, speaker similarity, and acoustic fidelity across diverse speech domains remain limited, particularly for low-resource and underrepresented languages. This paper presents a reproducible, multi-metric benchmarking framework for systematic evaluation of modern TTS systems through domain-specific analysis. The proposed framework integrates complementary subjective and objective evaluation protocols and is demonstrated through a comprehensive case study on a representative low-resource language spanning four speech domains: Formal, Conversational, Literary/Storytelling, and Emotional. Four state-of-the-art TTS systems -- Indic-Parler-TTS, MMS-TTS, Microsoft Edge TTS, and Google Gemini TTS -- are evaluated using MUSHRA listening tests, ABX discrimination tests, speaker similarity scoring with Resemblyzer, and acoustic analyses based on mel-cepstral distortion (MCD) and F0 RMSE over 960 audio pairs. Results reveal substantial variation in TTS performance across speech domains, with emotional speech consistently presenting the greatest synthesis challenge (mean MCD 12.03 dB; mean F0 RMSE 889 cents), while conversational speech achieves the highest overall acoustic fidelity. Beyond the empirical findings, this work provides a reproducible evaluation framework, publicly releasing evaluation scripts, result tables, and executable Colab notebooks to support standardized benchmarking and future research on TTS evaluation for low-resource languages.
With the development of audio large language models (AudioLLMs), audio captioning needs to move from brief descriptions toward open-ended and fine-grained free-form descriptions. Existing evaluations often focus on generation quality or task performance, making it difficult to diagnose information coverage and description reliability. We propose MMAC, a \textbf{M}assive \textbf{M}ulti-dimensional benchmark for \textbf{A}udio \textbf{C}aptioning. MMAC contains 5,638 audio clips from more than 20 data sources, covering 6 capability categories and 15 evaluation dimensions. Given a model-generated caption, MMAC checks whether it mentions relevant information in the target dimension and whether the mentioned content is consistent with the reference label. We evaluate representative open-source and proprietary AudioLLMs. Results show clear differences across evaluation dimensions, information coverage, and description reliability. We will release the MMAC benchmark and evaluation code.
A. Sayyad, J. Emmons, S. Jones +2cs.CL cs.AI cs.SD eess.AS
We report the empirical reliability of Gemini models as audio judges that score full-duplex agent conversations directly from the raw stereo waveform, tested across three models in the Gemini family: 2.5 Flash, 3.5 Flash, and 3.1 Pro. Our primary evidence base uses Gemini 2.5 Flash as the ground-truth model, validated against three calibrated human raters on 209 stereo sessions, scored on 8 production dimensions: 152 full-duplex conversations across 13 accent-and-condition strata, together with 57 adversarial defect-injected clips. The evidence for Gemini 2.5 Flash is consistent across three tests. (i) On 5 of 8 dimensions the LALM-human Spearman rho departs from the pairwise human-human rho by at most 0.07, and on 7 of 8 dimensions the two quantities 95 percent bootstrap confidence intervals overlap. (ii) The LALM agrees with the three-rater human mean within 1 point on 60 to 92 percent of sessions on 6 of 8 dimensions. (iii) On 45 of 48 (defect, dimension) cells the LALM is as sensitive as humans or better under Newcombe-Wilson 95 percent confidence intervals, though most of these are underpowered nulls rather than demonstrated parity. Rank-ordering ability transfers across the Gemini family: 3.5 Flash improves simple agreement to 8 of 8 dimensions, while 3.1 Pro rates several dimensions markedly lower than humans despite comparable rank correlation. A model swap should be re-validated on calibration specifically, not assumed from rank-correlation alone. We identify four areas where deployment requires care, and we estimate that human rating alone for our current evaluation cadence costs roughly two orders of magnitude more than the equivalent LALM workload. The data presented here provides a defensible empirical basis for deploying the LALM as a substitute or fourth rater on the dimensions where the evidence supports it.
Industry pipelines that turn speech into supervised fine-tuning (SFT) data via multi-stage refinement are increasingly adopted but, to our knowledge, have not been publicly ablated stage-by-stage, leaving each stage's marginal value unknown. We design a production-ready speech-to-SFT pipeline in which transcript refinement (Phase 0) and SFT data quality refinement (Phase 2) are independently toggleable, yielding a 2x2 factorial design. For each condition, we generate QA-form SFT data from Korean medical and finance conference recordings and fine-tune 9 models (5 LLM families, 2.4B-70B); we evaluate with four cross-provider LLM judges, a blind six-expert human evaluation, and 3 downstream MCQA benchmarks. Our central finding: under a fixed, standard SFT recipe, improvements in QA data quality do not transfer uniformly into downstream MCQA gains. 4-judge quality rises consistently, yet the cross-model mean MCQA gain is not significant; positive transfer concentrates on family-domain aligned pairs. This differential pattern is consistent with a format mismatch: Phase 2 shifts SFT-data composition toward explanatory items, while MCQA primarily probes factoid recall. All six human raters report higher full-pipeline quality, confirming the LLM-judge direction. An STT-engine swap to Whisper-medium confirms pipeline robustness. A non-hallucination audit shows the two frontier LLMs admit unknown on approximately 8% of QA on average; we release samples, prompts, code, and all SFT checkpoints.
ASR systems have been often reported to underperform on atypical speech. An often conflated compounding factor is the existence of two valid transcription references: verbatim (actual produced speech, including repetitions/prolongations) and intended (the canonical form of the text with disfluencies removed) in atypical speech recognition depending on context and use-case. Most ASR evaluations conflate this duality into a single ground truth and reward systems that delete disfluencies, ignoring verbatim faithfulness. We benchmark 11 ASR models from encoder-decoder, CTC and transducer families using both verbatim and intended references on atypical stuttered speech as a case study. Our quantitative assessment underlines the disparity in model performance and rankings using the two transcript styles. Through this analysis, we highlight the importance of selecting a suitable transcription reference for valid model selection depending on the use-case, particularly for atypical ASR.
Pengfei Zhang, Hoang H Nguyen, Kazi Shaharair Sharif +6cs.SD cs.AI cs.MM
Recent Large Audio Language Models (LALMs) have achieved remarkable progress in audio perceptual tasks across individual acoustic layers, including speech, sound, and music. However, existing benchmarks predominantly evaluate these layers in isolation, overlooking the complex contextual relationships that arise when multiple acoustic sources co-occur in real-world auditory scenes. Real-world auditory interpretation requires Context-Aware Auditory Scene Understanding (CASU): the ability to comprehend the holistic scene by integrating sound layers. To evaluate this capability, we introduce the CASU benchmark, which assesses whether Audio LLMs can interpret auditory scenes composed of speech, acoustic events (e.g., announcements), and background environments (e.g., traffic), and reason about the logical relationships between these layers. We propose a scalable pipeline for constructing time-accurate, semi-synthetic audio streams by composing real-world scene sounds with synthetic speech. Building on this data, we design four tasks that probe scene understanding: contextual question answering, entity extraction from the scene, speaker role inference, and counterfactual reasoning where scene is manipulated. Experiments across multiple LALMs demonstrate that effective auditory scene understanding requires integration over all auditory layers, rather than reliance on speech or sound alone, underscoring the necessity of CASU for advancing complex audio understanding in LALMs.
Chinese news text contains dense written forms such as scores, hyphenated model names, ranges, unit symbols, percentages, English abbreviations, and mixed Chinese-Latin-digit names. These forms are frequent in real listening workflows, and a text-to-speech (TTS) system can preserve the written string while changing the spoken meaning. We introduce CN-NewsTTS Bench v0.1, an open target-level benchmark for evaluating whether Chinese news TTS products pronounce such targets correctly from raw text, without user-side rules, LLM rewriting, SSML hints, or manual edits. The release contains a 200-record development set, an 800-record public test set, 992 public auto-evaluable targets, fixed transcripts from a three-ASR ensemble, an automatic target scorer, and initial results for seven product TTS systems. We additionally report ASR-route diagnostics, ASR-subset ablations, category-level results, confidence intervals, and provider configuration metadata. The best system reaches 0.879 strict accuracy, while several systems remain below 0.60.
Yanze Xu, Mark D. Plumbley, Wenwu Wangeess.AS cs.AI eess.SP
Explaining and understanding the decision-making process of artificial intelligence (AI) systems, particularly those implemented by neural networks, falls within the field of explainable AI (XAI). Analogous to the human attention mechanism, neural networks are assumed to possess their own attention mechanisms that selectively process information during decision-making. This work proposes to study one XAI topic: analysing and visualising the attention mechanisms of neural networks. Our experiments are performed on speaker recognition neural networks that are trained to identify speaker identity from a given utterance. Previous studies have widely used class activation map (CAM)-based methods to analyse and visualise the attention mechanisms of neural networks. Each of these methods produces an attention map for each network input, highlighting which input regions are selectively processed when the speaker recognition network makes decisions. However, the evaluation of attention maps produced by these methods remains largely underexplored. This work systematically reviews an existing attention map evaluation algorithm, establishing key concepts and identifying its shortcomings. On the basis of this existing evaluation algorithm, a new version is then proposed to address the identified shortcomings, called the Modified Randomised Input Sampling for Explanation - Evaluation algorithm (Modified RISE-eval). Using Modified RISE-eval, we evaluate the attention maps produced by two representative CAM-based methods, GradCAM and LayerCAM, applied to a certain speaker recognition network. The evaluation results demonstrate that GradCAM and LayerCAM each exhibit distinct advantages when applied under different experimental conditions in the speaker recognition task.
Younghan Park, Hoyeon Lee, Hawon Jeong +1cs.CL cs.AI
Reliable evaluation of phrase break annotations is crucial, as subtle variations in prosodic boundaries directly affect the clarity and naturalness of speech. However, existing approaches exhibit major limitations: single-reference evaluation assumes a unique gold phrasing for an utterance despite multiple valid phrasings, while human judgment, though flexible, is labor-intensive and unscalable. To address these, we propose LLM-based Multi-Reference Evaluation (LMRE) for phrase break annotations that models the one-to-many nature of prosodic phrasing and generates multiple valid phrasings from minimal demonstrations. On a Korean testbed of 1,356 annotations covering five strategies, LMRE shows stronger alignment with human judgment than single-reference evaluation in both acceptance behavior and score correlation. Our findings demonstrate that LMRE effectively achieves both scalability and multi-reference support, highlighting the potential of LLMs for evaluation in the speech domain.
Machine interpreting (MI), the live, real-time application of speech translation, has achieved remarkable progress on standard benchmarks, with some systems approaching human parity on textual fidelity. Yet the user experience remains far inferior to interpreter-mediated communication, revealing what we term the accuracy illusion: systems that appear accurate on paper but fail in practice to support smooth, goal-oriented interaction. This paper defines MI as a distinct subfield of speech translation, with its own characteristics and the need for evaluation methods grounded in communicative effectiveness rather than isolated fidelity metrics. Drawing on insights from interpreting studies, we identify critical dimensions of professional interpreting practice that are overlooked by current systems, and consolidate them into three interdependent design priorities for future MI: agency (context-sensitive initiative and repair), grounding (multimodal and discourse-level situational awareness), and experience (adaptive improvement through real interaction). Together, these priorities chart a path toward closing the usability gap and enabling systems that can sustain authentic multilingual communication in real time.
Humans process rich auditory environments through tightly integrated cognitive capabilities such as audio perception, audio reasoning, and memory. Despite recent progress in large audio-language models (LALMs) across speech understanding and multimodal audio reasoning, current evaluation paradigms remain largely task- or modality-centric, focusing on end performance while overlooking underlying auditory cognitive behaviours. This reveals a fundamental gap between how auditory cognition is understood in humans and how it is evaluated in LALMs, particularly in the lack of frameworks that operationalise cognitive principles beyond task-level metrics to systematically capture model behaviour. In this work, we introduce RAIL, a human-centric evaluation paradigm grounded in the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) cognitive framework. RAIL formalises auditory cognition into five core capabilities and develop them into structured evaluation tasks that probe how models process, retain, and integrate auditory information. We further construct a cognitively grounded benchmark with principled data curation and human-aligned evaluation protocols. Evaluating 26 state-of-the-art LALMs, we find that current models exhibit highly uneven performance across cognitive abilities. RAIL establishes a new evaluation paradigm that moves beyond task-centric benchmarking toward cognitively grounded assessment of auditory intelligence.
Chien-Chun Wang, Hung-Shin Lee, Hsin-Min Wang +1eess.AS cs.AI cs.MM cs.SD
Evaluating text-to-music (TTM) systems remains expensive because music impression (MI) and text alignment (TA) scores rely on human mean opinion scores (MOS). Most automatic MOS estimators are trained with point-wise regression or distributional classification. These objectives do not directly optimize rank-based metrics and provide weak geometric constraints for cross-modal coherence. To address these gaps, we propose DeRA-MOS, a decoupled optimization framework for TTM evaluation. For MI, we introduce a batch-aware listwise ranking loss that models relative order within each mini-batch and better aligns with evaluation based on Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (SRCC). For TA, we introduce a score-anchored modality alignment loss that maps human scores to target audio-text similarity and regularizes the latent space before fusion. By effectively mitigating the point-wise training mismatch and modality drift, experiments on MusicEval demonstrate that our decoupled framework yields substantial improvements in both MI and TA ranking metrics, establishing a robust paradigm for large-scale TTM evaluation.
We introduce MMAE, a Massive Multitask Audio Editing benchmark, serving as the first comprehensive evaluation testbed designed for general-purpose instruction-based audio editing. Spurred by the shift toward intelligent creation, interactive editing has rapidly expanded from visual domains, pioneered by models like Nano-banana 2 for images and Gemini-Omni for video, into audio. However, the current evaluation infrastructure lags severely, remaining highly fragmented and restricted to specific subdomains or basic operations. Unlike existing benchmarks that are limited in scope, MMAE extends to a broad spectrum of real-world scenarios, encompassing 7 distinct audio modalities, including sound, speech, music, and their mixtures. Furthermore, we establish a comprehensive taxonomy spanning 6 levels of task complexity, from basic modifications to multi-hop reasoning and multi-round editing, 2 levels of granularity, and 8 distinct operation types. Meticulously curated through human-agent collaboration, MMAE comprises 2,000 high-fidelity samples paired with a pioneering rubric-based evaluation framework. By decomposing free-form tasks into 17,741 verifiable criteria, this robust rubric-based paradigm enables a precise, multi-dimensional assessment of both instruction following and context consistency. Our extensive evaluation of leading models reveals that current systems remain far from achieving reliable edits. Strikingly, the Exact Match Rate (EMR) consistently falls below 5% and plummets to an absolute 0% in complex, mixed-modality tasks, exposing critical bottlenecks in precise execution and structural robustness. We hope MMAE will serve as a catalyst for future advances in the intelligent creation community, providing a clear diagnostic roadmap and establishing a standardized, long-lasting evaluation paradigm for next-generation audio editing systems.
Faria Binte Kader, Mohtasim Hadi Rafi, Shah Wasif Sajjad +1cs.SD cs.AI eess.AS
Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promising results in music understanding and generation tasks. However, existing works remain confined to Western tonal traditions, offering little insight into whether current LLMs can handle structurally distinct low-resource musical traditions. We present the first systematic evaluation of LLM competence in South Asian classical music, a tradition governed by raga, tala-based melodic constraints that impose fundamentally different structural principles from Western harmony-driven music. We ground our evaluation in Hindustani classical theory and Bengali classical forms, including Rabindra and Nazrul Sangeet -- representative low-resource traditions within South Asian classical music. For music understanding evaluation, we introduce a 504-question-answer benchmark spanning raga grammar, cultural knowledge, and symbolic notation reasoning, evaluating 33 LLMs where frontier models such as Gemini 2.5 Pro achieve 85-90% accuracy, while most open-source models remain in the 23-40% range. For music generation, we design a five-level controlled prompting framework and find that even the strongest model produces stylistically faithful outputs only 40% of the time. These results reveal that structural validity and stylistic faithfulness in music generation are distinct objectives and highlight an open challenge for culturally grounded music modeling.