Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · September 30, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Audio language models (ALMs) are increasingly used for audio deepfake detection (ADD), yet existing benchmarks assess their verdicts or rationale plausibility without verifying the underlying acoustic evidence. To address this issue, we first introduce spoofing evidence-grounded audio reasoning (SEAR), a four-task AQA benchmark to evaluate ALM-based ADD through acoustic evidence identification and quantification, deepfake detection, and forensic rationale generation. We further propose a bona-fide-based acoustic evidence agent (BAEA), which equips a frozen ALM with controlled acoustic tools under \textsc{fixed} or \textsc{adaptive} evidence-acquisition policies. Experiments with six ALMs reveal a clear gap between plausible rationales and verifiable acoustic evidence reasoning, while BAEA-\textsc{Fixed} improves final verdicts and forensic rationales on both evaluation partitions. Controlled interventions further show that misleading evidence degrades both detection and grounding performance.