Siminfar Samakoush Galougah

Siminfar Samakoush Galougah, Ramani Duraiswami

This paper presents a differentiable optimization framework for the design of constrained Linear Differential Microphone Arrays (LDMAs). The proposed method leverages a non-uniform delay-and-sum beamformer as a light-weight base system model, proving its ability to achieve the optimal beampattern of LDMAs by jointly optimizing microphone positions and filter weights. The formulation enables the optimized design of a filter with a distortion-free constraint in the desired sound direction, while also imposing constraints on microphone positioning to ensure consistent performance. Through evaluation on multiple metrics, including Mean Squared Error (MSE), Directivity Index (DI), White Noise Gain (WNG), and computation time, and comparison with state-of-the-art methods, this approach demonstrates a flexible, directive, robust, and hardware-efficient design.

Siminfar Samakoush Galougah, Rishie Raj, Sanjoy Chowdhury et al.

Current audio-visual (AV) benchmarks focus on final answer accuracy, overlooking the underlying reasoning process. This makes it difficult to distinguish genuine comprehension from correct answers derived through flawed reasoning or hallucinations. To address this, we introduce AURA (Audio-visual Understanding and Reasoning Assessment), a benchmark for evaluating the cross-modal reasoning capabilities of Audio-Visual Large Language Models (AV-LLMs) and Omni-modal Language Models (OLMs). AURA includes questions across six challenging cognitive domains, such as causality, timbre and pitch, tempo and AV synchronization, unanswerability, implicit distractions, and skill profiling, explicitly designed to be unanswerable from a single modality. This forces models to construct a valid logical path grounded in both audio and video, setting AURA apart from AV datasets that allow uni-modal shortcuts. To assess reasoning traces, we propose a novel metric, AuraScore, which addresses the lack of robust tools for evaluating reasoning fidelity. It decomposes reasoning into two aspects: (i) Factual Consistency - whether reasoning is grounded in perceptual evidence, and (ii) Core Inference - the logical validity of each reasoning step. Evaluations of SOTA models on AURA reveal a critical reasoning gap: although models achieve high accuracy (up to 92% on some tasks), their Factual Consistency and Core Inference scores fall below 45%. This discrepancy highlights that models often arrive at correct answers through flawed logic, underscoring the need for our benchmark and paving the way for more robust multimodal evaluation.