REVIEW 5 cited by
V-STaR: Benchmarking Video-LLMs on Video Spatio-Temporal Reasoning
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Human processes video reasoning in a sequential spatio-temporal reasoning logic, we first identify the relevant frames ("when") and then analyse the spatial relationships ("where") between key objects, and finally leverage these relationships to draw inferences ("what"). However, can Video Large Language Models (Video-LLMs) also "reason through a sequential spatio-temporal logic" in videos? Existing Video-LLM benchmarks primarily focus on assessing object presence, neglecting relational reasoning. Consequently, it is difficult to measure whether a model truly comprehends object interactions (actions/events) in videos or merely relies on pre-trained "memory" of co-occurrences as biases in generating answers. In this work, we introduce a Video Spatio-Temporal Reasoning (V-STaR) benchmark to address these shortcomings. The key idea is to decompose video understanding into a Reverse Spatio-Temporal Reasoning (RSTR) task that simultaneously evaluates what objects are present, when events occur, and where they are located while capturing the underlying Chain-of-thought (CoT) logic. To support this evaluation, we construct a dataset to elicit the spatial-temporal reasoning process of Video-LLMs. It contains coarse-to-fine CoT questions generated by a semi-automated GPT-4-powered pipeline, embedding explicit reasoning chains to mimic human cognition. Experiments from 14 Video-LLMs on our V-STaR reveal significant gaps between current Video-LLMs and the needs for robust and consistent spatio-temporal reasoning.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
$M^3-Verse$: A "Spot the Difference" Challenge for Large Multimodal Models
A new benchmark tests whether large multimodal models can compare paired 'before and after' videos to detect scene changes, and finds current models perform near random.
-
Video Reasoning without Training
An entropy-guided, inference-time value-cache controller improves video reasoning accuracy and cuts output tokens versus RL-trained baselines.
-
Position: Reasoning After Perception Means Reasoning Without Vision
Reasoning in text space cannot recover visual information that was collapsed during perception, so multimodal models need architectures that reason within the visual representation.
-
LanteRn: Latent Visual Structured Reasoning
A 3B vision-language model trained to emit latent visual thought tokens interleaved with text, then refined by reinforcement learning, outperforms a matched text-only baseline on several visual reasoning benchmarks.
-
Video-XL-2: Towards Very Long-Video Understanding Through Task-Aware KV Sparsification
Video-XL-2 cuts long-video inference cost with chunked pre-filling and query-gated dense-or-sparse KV reloading, reporting half the FLOPs and a third less decoding memory at roughly equal benchmark scores.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.