While large language models have demonstrated impressive reasoning abilities, their extension to the audio modality, particularly within large audio-language models (LALMs), remains underexplored. Addressing this gap requires a systematic approach that involves a capable base model, high-quality reasoning-oriented audio data, and effective training algorithms. In this work, we present a comprehensive solution for audio logical reasoning (ALR) tasks: we introduce SoundMind, a dataset of 6,446 audio–text annotated samples specifically curated to support complex reasoning. Building on this resource, we propose SoundMind-RL, a rule-based reinforcement learning (RL) algorithm designed to equip audio-language models with robust audio–text reasoning capabilities. By fine-tuning Qwen2.5-Omni-7B on the proposed SoundMind dataset using SoundMind-RL, we achieve strong and consistent improvements over state-of-the-art baselines on the SoundMind benchmark. This work highlights the benefit of combining high-quality, reasoning-focused datasets with specialized RL techniques, and contributes to advancing auditory intelligence in language models. The code and dataset are publicly available at https://github.com/xid32/SoundMind.

LLM-as-Judge has emerged as a scalable alternative to human evaluation, enabling large language models (LLMs) to provide reward signals in trainings. While recent work has explored multi-agent extensions such as multi-agent debate and meta-judging to enhance evaluation quality, the question of how intrinsic biases manifest in these settings remains underexplored. In this study, we conduct a systematic analysis of four diverse bias types: position bias, verbosity bias, chain-of-thought bias, and bandwagon bias. We evaluate these biases across two widely adopted multi-agent LLM-as-Judge frameworks: Multi-Agent-Debate and LLM-as-Meta-Judge. Our results show that debate framework amplifies biases sharply after the initial debate, and this increased bias is sustained in subsequent rounds, while meta-judge approaches exhibit greater resistance. We further investigate the incorporation of PINE, a leading single-agent debiasing method, as a bias-free agent within these systems. The results reveal that this bias-free agent effectively reduces biases in debate settings but provides less benefit in meta-judge scenarios. Our work provides a comprehensive study of bias behavior in multi-agent LLM-as-Judge systems and highlights the need for targeted bias mitigation strategies in collaborative evaluation settings.