When Audio and Video Mislead: Evaluating Multimodal AI for Conversational Emotion Recognition

arXiv:2611.11987v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multimodal Emotion Recognition in Conversation (MERC) combines lexical, acoustic, visual and conversational cues, but accepting audio and video does not establish their effective or robust use. We audit off-the-shelf Omni models while holding the target transcript and prior textual context fixed and adding, removing or replacing target audio and video. In the primary evaluation of Qwen2.5-Omni-7B, Baichuan-Omni-1.5 and MiniCPM-o 2.6 on MELD and the full five-session six-class IEMOCAP set, T+A improves Accuracy in all six model-dataset pairs, with four gains significant after false discovery rate (FDR) correction. Across three source mappings, unrelated A/V (RandA/V) lowers Accuracy relative to Full in all 18 comparisons; all 18 remain significant under dialogue-cluster inference and BH-FDR correction, both on common-valid pairs and when invalid/OOM outcomes are treated as incorrect. Comparisons with modality-omission baselines further distinguish replacement penalties from mismatch-specific harm. A Qwen/MELD case study finds significantly greater gold-vs-best-candidate margin recovery in Late than Early or Middle under decision-query audio knockout, relative to an edge-count-matched Video-Sham control, using Holm-corrected tests. These results distinguish genuine-modality benefit from sensitivity and vulnerability to misleading input.