Abstract
Voice-interactive large language models process both what a speaker says and how they say it, yet the two channels do not always agree. We ask whether that disagreement degrades speech emotion recognition. Mapping text and audio into a shared valence-arousal-dominance space, we convert the distance between them into a continuous, threshold-free incongruence score with a two-component Gaussian mixture, and validate the score against human judgement. We evaluate three audiocapable models on acted, conversational and spontaneous speech (eNTERFACE'05, MELD and CMU-MOSEI). With the model held constant across modalities, incongruence raises the odds of error whenever audio is present, in every corpus, after controlling for the ground-truth emotion and for distance in the feature space. Supervised classifiers trained on the same features behave in the opposite way, which suggests that the difficulty lies in how these models combine raw evidence rather than in the signal itself. Text-only effects are unreliable: swapping only the model that reads the transcript reverses their sign on one corpus. Rebuilding the score without the emotion lexicon reproduces the central result, and among six simpler alternatives it is the only label-free score that predicts error in all three corpora. Code, data tables and prompts are released.
Abstract (translated)
URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.40883
