Craver Corbyn Thomas-Smith

Milan Liessens Dujardin, Song-Ze Yu, Craver Corbyn Thomas-Smith et al.

Audio-language models (ALMs) are increasingly used in real-world applications that require understanding music, from music tutoring and transcription to captioning, recommendation systems, and music production. More broadly, they are becoming an important component of multimodal AI systems that must reason from sensory input rather than text alone. This makes reliable musical perception a critical prerequisite: if a model cannot accurately hear the structure of sound, it cannot be trusted to reason about, teach, transcribe, or act on audio in the real world. Yet existing benchmarks rarely assess one of the most fundamental musical abilities underlying such perception: pitch hearing. Current evaluations tend to probe pitch hearing only indirectly, through higher-level tasks and often in multiple-choice formats, leaving open how reliably ALMs identify fine-grained pitch across instruments, acoustic conditions, and response formats. We introduce PitchBench, an evaluation suite that systematically measures pitch hearing in ALMs. PitchBench comprises 28 experiments spanning absolute and relative pitch perception within sequences and chords, while varying loudness, note duration, sound source, time stretching, background noise, and other acoustic conditions. Tasks range from identifying individual pitches in isolation to tracking a melodic line within a four-part musical texture. Evaluating frontier ALMs, we find that pitch hearing remains highly unreliable: models perform consistently poorly across settings, with accuracy varying sharply by sound source, note duration, and notation format. Current ALMs do not yet possess stable pitch perception, even for controlled synthetic and instrumental stimuli. Alongside the benchmark, we release PitchBench as a Python package containing the evaluation data and data generation tools to support future work on pitch-aware audio-language modeling.

Kate M. Lubrano, Faisal Sayed, Ankita Rathod et al.

Emotional intelligence (EI), the ability to perceive, understand, and respond appropriately to others' emotional states, is central to human communication, and increasingly important to assess as LLMs assume conversational roles in everyday life. Existing EI benchmarks rely on synthetic prompts, single-turn cases, or third-party annotation. These approaches do not directly measure how models infer and respond to a participant's emotional state over the course of a real conversation. We introduce AttuneBench, a benchmark grounded in 200 genuine multi-turn human-model conversations in which participants conversed with anonymized LLMs and provided turn-by-turn annotations of their emotional state, the model's behavior, and their preferred responses. Across 11 evaluated models, we find that model rankings on emotion recognition, behavioral classification, preference prediction, and judged response quality are largely independent, indicating that emotionally intelligent behavior decomposes into separable capabilities. Preference alignment and response-quality judgments are substantially more model-discriminating than emotion-label accuracy. These results indicate that emotionally intelligent behavior requires predicting what kind of response a specific user wants in context, a distinction that aggregate scoring can obscure and that single-turn or synthetic formats cannot directly capture across turns. AttuneBench provides a framework for assessing each of these capabilities and for diagnosing model-specific strengths and failure modes in emotionally salient conversation.