multimedia ai developers

Abstract: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) perform well on audio-visual question answering, but correct answers do not necessarily imply that their stated reasoning is grounded in relevant perceptual evidence. Existing benchmarks mainly evaluate final-answer accuracy, offering limited insight into whether model-generated rationales correctly identify visual regions, temporal intervals, and audio events supporting predictions. We introduce ANCHOR, a benchmark and evaluation framework for measuring grounded-rationale alignment in multimodal reasoning, comprising 2,319 videos and 8,272 question-answer pairs with structured reasoning traces, temporal evidence, spatial bounding boxes, and salient audio cues, including a human-refined test set of 224 videos and 975 question-answer pairs. We separately measure answer correctness, hallucination, logical divergence, and conciseness, with direct spatial and temporal grounding measurements on a focused subset. Across the full benchmark, twelve contemporary MLLMs show a substantial alignment gap: models with comparable answer performance can differ markedly in whether their explanations are supported by annotated evidence. On a matched subset of 100 videos and 446 question-answer pairs, rankings remain highly stable across human-refined, Gemini-generated, and GPT-generated references (mean Pearson r=0.99), providing evidence against model-reference circularity within this subset. Grounding-cue ablations of three MLLMs on the full human-refined test set reveal a consistent modality hierarchy: removing video reduces accuracy by 38.4-41.8 points, while removing bounding boxes (3.2-7.7 points) and audio (4.2-5.6 points) causes smaller, complementary, model-dependent drops. These findings show answer-only evaluation obscures important grounding failures and position ANCHOR as a testbed for evaluating accurate and evidence-aligned audio-visual reasoning.

Abstract: Reward-guided inference-time alignment can improve joint audio-visual generation, but optimizing multiple alignment objectives requires many expensive model evaluations, making existing methods costly under limited compute. Particle-based search enables global exploration but incurs estimation error with a finite population, while Metropolis-Hastings (MH) can refine candidates locally but benefits from a strong initialization. We introduce \textbf{S}pend \textbf{W}here \textbf{I}t \textbf{M}atters (\modelname), a two-stage, training-free, reward-agnostic framework that combines particle search with MH refinement under a fixed compute budget. In the first stage, we adaptively allocate particles across denoising checkpoints using online variance estimates, minimizing estimation variance while concentrating compute where it is most useful. This search provides a promising candidate for MH refinement, which uses local noise-and-denoise proposals on completed outputs to further improve reward. By starting from a strong candidate, MH can recover additional reward without requiring a larger particle population or costly global exploration. We show that, at matched compute, combining particle search with MH refinement achieves higher rewards than either approach alone. On \textsc{JavisBench-Mini}, at closely matched compute, \modelname achieves mean relative gains across seven metrics of $30.7\%$ over BoN and $14.1\%$ over EvoSearch with JavisDiT++, and $9.2\%$ over BoN and $17.0\%$ over EvoSearch with LTX-2. Beyond joint audio-visual generation, we also demonstrate the benefits of adaptive particle allocation on SD1.5 image generation, improving AestheticScore by $2.2\%$ and ImageReward by $6.0\%$ over uniform allocation.

Abstract: Recent text-to-audio-video (T2AV) models jointly generate video, speech, sound effects, and ambience from a single text prompt. This capability poses new challenges for safety evaluation, as unsafe content may be conveyed through the audio track or arise only when the visual and audio tracks are interpreted jointly. Existing safety benchmarks largely focus on either generated video or generated audio in isolation and are therefore not designed to capture these risks. To close this gap, we introduce AV-SafetyBench, the first safety benchmark developed specifically for T2AV generation. AV-SafetyBench comprises a four-axis, 13-category taxonomy and 5,200 manually reviewed prompts that specify visual scenes, speech, and non-speech audio. Our evaluation protocol assesses each output under three views: Full-AV, Video-Only, and Audio-Only. It then uses the Video-Only and Audio-Only judgments to assign Full-AV unsafe outputs to one of four risk sources: Video-Only, Audio-Only, AV-Both, or AV-Joint. We evaluate five open-source T2AV models and validate the automated Full-AV judgments against human annotations. Across the five models, Full-AV Unsafe Rates range from 25.1% to 49.4%. Beyond these aggregate rates, risk-source analysis reveals that, for four of the five models, Audio-Only and AV-Joint cases-unsafe outputs missed by video-only evaluation-account for 41.6-48.3% of Full-AV unsafe outputs for which a risk source could be assigned. In the Cross-Modal Harm Emergence category, AV-Joint accounts for 87.5% of unsafe outputs withan assigned risk source. Together, these findings demonstrate the value of AV-SafetyBench for evaluating T2AV safety across the visual and audio modalities and their interaction.