MiLTL: A Cross-Modal Contradiction Cascade for On-Device Voice Phishing Detection

Counts differ because each database indexes a different set of publications. We treat OpenAlex as the canonical count; Google Scholar is not shown (no API, and crawling it violates its ToS).

Voice phishing (vishing) causes financial and psychological harm, yet deployed detectors that scan transcripts for scam vocabulary are more fragile than their benchmark scores suggest: their near-perfect accuracy on standard Korean corpora is memorization, collapsing under scammer paraphrase or language-model rewriting. We construct KorMMP, a benchmark keeping real regulator-sourced scam audio and real benign speech but decorrelating transcript from label, and MiLTL, an on-device detector built on affective and neutrosophic channels, including a cross-modal contradiction signal (XM) formulated to weigh lexical warmth against vocal coldness. In the reported evaluation, XM’s measured contribution is confidence banding and escalation routing rather than ranking accuracy. A scoring rule with zero gradient-learned parameters at inference screens every segment, referring ambiguous calls to a small on-device language model; raw audio stays on the device. We measure both stages on a commodity CPU container and smartphone; these budgets cover the detector only and exclude speech recognition, which we expect to dominate a live end-to-end budget. With no training on the hard benchmark, MiLTL achieves an AUROC of 0.965 (recording-level cluster bootstrap 95% CI 0.943–0.984), while every evaluated comparator stays below 0.69: text-only, audio-only, fusion, 7B multimodal. MiLTL scores lower on the saturated corpus, as expected for a detector designed not to rely primarily on lexical shortcuts. KorMMP is a controlled stress test of lexical decorrelation, not a measure of in-the-wild detection; its harmful and benign audio come from different corpora, so the source and label are structurally confounded, and the residual source effects cannot be fully excluded. XM is author-defined, constructed rather than naturally occurring in the synthetic stratum and not yet validated against human perception; this is the principal open limitation of the work. Within that scope, the work provides a reproducible basis for on-device vishing defense and a benchmark for detector robustness under vocabulary shift.