Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 34 references

Adaptive Two-Stage Visual Token Pruning for Efficient Inference in Video-Language Models

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper shows that a two-stage, content-adaptive token-pruning rule outperforms fixed-ratio baselines for video-language models, delivering over 6% accuracy gains on a captioning benchmark at 10% token retention.

desk verdict A useful pruning method whose adaptive ratio is plausible but under-validated: the gains could partly come from per-dataset calibration of κ rather than from the content-adaptive mechanism. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.03112 v1 pith:A2MAQC3O submitted 2026-08-04 cs.CV cs.AI

Paribesh Regmi , Qingshuang Chen , Chi Zhang , Heba Aly , Yelin Kim , Hongda Mao This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.AI
keywords visualtokenpruningvideo-languagemodelsadaptiveretentionratioeigenvaluedecaytraining-freeinferenceaccelerationtemporalredundancyframe-levelcorrelationmatrix
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that video-language models can be made much cheaper to run by pruning visual tokens in two stages, first dropping redundant frames and then dropping redundant tokens within the kept frames, with the number of tokens kept decided per video rather than fixed in advance. The authors argue that existing training-free pruning methods use a one-size-fits-all retention ratio and ignore temporal redundancy, which wastes computation and loses accuracy. They report consistent gains over fixed-ratio baselines across three vision-language models and five video benchmarks, including over 6% higher accuracy on a video captioning benchmark at 10% token retention, while cutting LLM computation by roughly 95.5%. If correct, the recipe is a plug-in efficiency improvement that needs no fine-tuning.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the exponential decay rate $\alpha$ of the eigenvalue spectrum of the token-correlation matrix: after pruning frames, the method computes pairwise correlations among the surviving token embeddings, extracts the top 32 eigenvalues via low-rank SVD, and fits $\log \lambda_n = \log A - \alpha n$. A steep spectrum (large $\alpha$) signals high redundancy and yields a small retention ratio $\beta=\kappa/\alpha$; a flat spectrum signals diversity and yields a larger budget. The first stage, frame-level diversity selection at ratio $\gamma$, handles temporal redundancy, and the second stage prunes tokens within kept frames. The method is post-hoc, requiring no training, and the SVD is deliberately low-rank to keep the overhead small.

What would settle it

Construct or find a video that is mostly static but contains one short, task-critical event, compute its $\alpha$, prune at the resulting $\beta$, and compare accuracy against a fixed-ratio baseline at the same average budget; if the adaptive rule loses on the critical detail, the decay rate is not faithfully measuring needed tokens.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery, stated in the paper's terms, is that the right number of visual tokens for a video can be read off the correlation structure of its token embeddings. After frame-level diversity selection, the method builds the correlation matrix of the remaining token embeddings, takes its top eigenvalues, and fits an exponential curve to their decay; the decay rate $\alpha$ is treated as a redundancy score, and the token-level retention ratio is set to $\beta = \kappa/\alpha$, with $\kappa$ chosen so the average budget matches the baselines. The paper reports that at equal average retention (30%, 15%, 10%) this adaptive rule beats fixed-ratio training-free baselines on VideoDC, VideoChatGPT, NextQA, PerceptionTest, and Video-MME, with the largest gains on open-ended captioning and QA tasks. It also reports the same pattern across InternVL3 and Qwen2.5VL and across 1B, 2B, and 7B model sizes.

Load-bearing premise

The method assumes the steepness of the eigenvalue drop-off in a video's token correlations tells how many tokens the model truly needs, so a video whose tokens look redundant but whose few distinctive details matter would be pruned too hard.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Plug-in efficiency: any off-the-shelf video-language model can run the same two-stage pruning at inference time without retraining, so latency reductions apply to already-deployed models.
  • Content-dependent budgets: videos with repetitive, static content automatically receive fewer tokens than dynamic ones, so the same global compute budget is spent where it matters.
  • Large compute savings at low retention: at 10% average retention the method cuts LLM TFLOPs by about 95.5% while improving accuracy over fixed-ratio baselines on captioning and open-ended QA.
  • Consistency across model families and sizes: the gains appear on LLaVA-Video, InternVL3, and Qwen2.5VL, and on 1B, 2B, and 7B parameter sizes, suggesting the rule transfers rather than being tuned to one model.
  • Two-stage ordering matters: the paper's ablation shows that frame-level pruning followed by token-level pruning outperforms token-level pruning alone at the same total budget.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper, the same decay rate could be reused as a general redundancy signal, e.g. to choose how many frames to keep in the first stage rather than fixing $\gamma=0.5$, which the paper tunes per model.
  • Beyond the paper, the correlation-based budget could be combined with other token-selection rules, since it only decides how many tokens to keep and is agnostic to which selector picks them.
  • Beyond the paper, a testable extension is to apply the adaptive ratio to images by taking a single frame; the paper evaluates videos only, but the correlation argument is not video-specific.
  • Beyond the paper, one could monitor $\alpha$ as a video progresses and re-prune dynamically at the clip level, since the eigenvalue estimate is cheap enough to recompute.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a training-free, two-stage visual token pruning method for video-language models. The first stage selects diverse frames via diversity-based pruning, and the second stage prunes tokens within retained frames using a content-adaptive retention ratio beta = kappa / alpha, where alpha is the exponential decay rate fitted to the top eigenvalues of the token-embedding correlation matrix. The method is evaluated on LLaVA-Video, InternVL3, and Qwen2.5VL across five video benchmarks, comparing against fixed-ratio training-free baselines such as DivPrune, PruMerge, FastV, AvgPool, and LLaVA-Scissor. The reported results show consistent accuracy improvements, with the largest gains on video captioning (VideoDC), e.g., about 6-7% absolute accuracy at 10% retention, alongside large TFLOP reductions.

Significance. If the evaluation protocol were fully out-of-sample, this would be a practical and valuable plug-in efficiency method: it is post-hoc, requires no training, and the two-stage frame-then-token design is well motivated by temporal and spatial redundancy. The paper also provides useful ablations separating the two-stage mechanism from the adaptive ratio. However, the significance is conditional on the calibration protocol: the adaptive component depends on a constant kappa that is tuned per dataset, model, and target retention ratio, and the reported gains may reflect this per-benchmark tuning rather than a content-adaptive mechanism that generalizes. The absence of error bars and the selection of the exponential functional form on the test set further weaken the strength of the empirical claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.1 and Table 6] The central claim that the adaptive rule beta = kappa / alpha generalizes across videos is not supported by the current evaluation protocol. Table 6 shows that kappa is set separately for each dataset, each model, and each target retention ratio, and the reported accuracies are on the same test benchmarks used to select these values. Since kappa directly scales the retention ratio, this is effectively per-benchmark calibration of the average budget. The comparison to fixed-ratio baselines is therefore not out-of-sample. The paper should provide a held-out validation protocol, e.g., tuning kappa on a validation split or on one dataset and transferring to the others, and report the sensitivity of results to the choice of kappa. Without this, the reader cannot distinguish gains from the per-video variation in alpha from gains due to per-dataset tuning.
  2. [§3.2 and §4.4.2] The exponential functional form in Eq. (1) and the choice K=32 are justified only through a test-set ablation on VideoDC (Table 5). Formula selection on the same benchmark where the final numbers are reported inflates the apparent benefit of the exponential fit. Additionally, the paper asserts, but does not demonstrate, that the eigenvalue decay rate alpha faithfully measures how many tokens the model needs. A direct test would be to compare the per-video beta against a per-video oracle retention ratio, or at least to show that the chosen functional form and K transfer to held-out datasets without re-fitting. As written, the 'principled' derivation is an empirical fit with a hand-set constant.
  3. [§4.1 and Tables 1-3] The claim of consistent improvement over baselines is not supported by any measure of uncertainty. No error bars, repeated seeds, or significance tests are reported anywhere. At 30% retention, the gains over DivPrune are very small on multiple-choice datasets (Next-QA: 82.15 vs 82.05; Video-MME: 60.52 vs 60.48 in Table 1), so the strong statement in §4.1 that 'our method consistently outperforms the baseline' across all retention ratios would benefit from statistical support or a more nuanced phrasing. The large gains on VideoDC and VideoChatGPT at low retention are encouraging, but without uncertainty quantification it is unclear which of the reported differences are reliable.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table 1] The last two columns (time and TFLOPs) appear to list values only on the DivPrune rows; the rows for 'Ours' show time but no explicit TFLOP value, making the claimed ~95.5% TFLOP reduction difficult to verify directly from the table. Please format the table so that each method row has its own time and TFLOP entry.
  2. [§4] There is a typo in the first paragraph of Section 4: 'conduced' should be 'conducted'. Also, 'LLaV A-Video' is written with inconsistent spacing throughout; please standardize.
  3. [§3.2] The statement that 'the top 32 eigenvalues capture most of the spectral energy' is presented without supporting evidence or a reference; please provide a quantitative justification or cite prior work.
  4. [§5] The paper does not include a limitations section; given the calibration sensitivity identified above, a brief discussion of limitations (e.g., sensitivity to kappa, lack of uncertainty estimates, evaluation on specific VLM families) would improve the manuscript.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the retention rule is a defined scheduling formula and the reported accuracy gains are empirical, not forced by construction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is: token-correlation eigenvalues → exponential decay rate α (Eqs. 1–2) → retention ratio β = κ/α (Eq. 3). This is a definitional scheduling rule, not an inference whose conclusion is contained in its premises. α is measured from the token embeddings of each video, and κ is a hyperparameter that the paper states is set only to match the average retention of the baselines: "we set the hyperparameter κ such that on average the ratio is the same as baselines" (Section 4.1), with per-dataset values in Supplementary Table 6. Nothing in Eq. (3) encodes the reported accuracy numbers, so the superiority claim is not forced by construction. The exponential functional form is selected via an ablation on VideoDC (Section 4.4.2), and κ is calibrated on the same benchmark distribution; these are evaluation-protocol weaknesses (test-set model selection, no held-out validation, no error bars) rather than circularity under the criteria used here. There is no load-bearing self-citation chain: DivPrune [1] is used as an external selection subroutine, and the claimed gains are measured against external benchmarks rather than derived from cited uniqueness theorems. The central adaptive behavior—per-video variation of β through α—has independent empirical content even though κ is dataset- and target-ratio-specific.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a small number of design choices: the spectral redundancy measure (axioms about embedding correlations and exponential decay), a fitted scaling constant kappa, a manually set frame retention gamma, and a hand-picked eigenvalue count K. No new physical or architectural entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • kappa (adaptive ratio scaling) = varies by dataset/model/retention level (Table 6, e.g., 0.064 for LLaVA-Video at 30%)
    Chosen so that the average retention ratio matches the baseline target for each experimental configuration; this is a free parameter tuned to data.
  • gamma (frame retention ratio) = 0.5 for LLaVA-Video and InternVL; 1.0 for Qwen
    Set by hand and reported to be consistently better for the former; a design choice not derived from the method's principles.
  • K (number of eigenvalues used) = 32
    Selected as a practical trade-off between capturing spectral energy and computational cost; stated in Section 3.2 without systematic justification.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption CLIP/SigLIP contrastive training makes semantically similar patches have high cosine similarity, so linear correlation between embeddings measures information redundancy.
    Invoked in Section 3.2 to justify using the correlation matrix of token embeddings as a redundancy signal.
  • ad hoc to paper The eigenvalue spectrum of the token correlation matrix decays exponentially, so an exponential fit with decay rate alpha characterizes redundancy.
    The paper fits an exponential and then selects that functional form because it gives the best accuracy on the VideoDC benchmark (Section 4.4.2), making it an empirical choice rather than a proven law.
  • ad hoc to paper The top 32 eigenvalues capture most of the spectral energy and suffice to estimate the decay trend.
    Stated in Section 3.2 without analysis; used to justify the low-rank SVD approximation.
  • domain assumption An LLM judge (Claude Sonnet 3.7) can reliably score captioning and QA quality.
    Used in Section 4.1 for all generative metrics; no validation of the judge against human ratings is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Adaptive Two-Stage Visual Token Pruning for Efficient Inference in Video-Language Models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/A2MAQC3O

@misc{pith2026260803112,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Adaptive Two-Stage Visual Token Pruning for Efficient Inference in Video-Language Models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/A2MAQC3O}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.03112}
}
read the original abstract

Vision-language models excel at image and video understanding but suffer from high inference latency due to the need to process thousands of tokens per image, limiting their deployment on resource-constrained edge devices and in real-time surveillance applications. This challenge is further amplified in video processing, where multiple frames must be analyzed simultaneously. Existing token reduction techniques are largely developed for single-image inputs and therefore fail to account for the temporal and inter-frame redundancies present in video sequences. In addition, these methods generally rely on a fixed, uniform pruning ratio applied across all inputs, which is suboptimal because the degree of redundancy can vary significantly between different videos, necessitating content-dependent pruning levels to preserve critical information. To address these limitations, we propose a two-stage adaptive token pruning strategy specifically designed for video processing. In the first stage, we prune out the redundant frames, and in the second stage, token-level pruning is applied within the retained frames. Crucially, the pruning ratio in the second stage is determined adaptively based on the content of each video. This is achieved by analyzing the correlation structure of token embeddings to quantify redundancy, which is used to determine the ratio. Importantly, our method is entirely post-hoc and requires no additional training or fine-tuning, while achieving strong empirical gains; notably, it improves accuracy by +7\% on a video captioning benchmark at 10\% token retention, while reducing computation TFLOPs by 95\%.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.03112 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) A general block diagram of a VLM with our pruning algorithm applied on top of the vision encoder. (b) Two-stage pruning: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Determining the retention ratio β. After N tokens are obtained from the first-stage pruning ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Demonstration of the eigenvalue spectrum for two representative videos. The top panel corresponds to a video captured from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Performance of single-stage and two-stage pruning [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Divprune: Diversity-based visual token pruning for large multimodal models

    Saeed Ranjbar Alvar, Gursimran Singh, Mohammad Akbari, and Yong Zhang. Divprune: Diversity-based visual token pruning for large multimodal models. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 9392–9401, 2025. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6

    work page 2025

  2. [2]

    Shuai Bai, Keqin Chen, Xuejing Liu, Jialin Wang, Wenbin Ge, Sibo Song, Kai Dang, Peng Wang, Shijie Wang, Jun Tang, et al. Qwen2. 5-vl technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.13923, 2025. 1, 6

    arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    Llava-kd: A framework of distill- ing multimodal large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.16236, 2024

    Yuxuan Cai, Jiangning Zhang, Haoyang He, Xinwei He, Ao Tong, Zhenye Gan, Chengjie Wang, Zhucun Xue, Yong Liu, and Xiang Bai. Llava-kd: A framework of distill- ing multimodal large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.16236, 2024. 2

    arXiv

  4. [4]

    An image is worth 1/2 tokens after layer 2: Plug-and-play inference acceleration for large vision-language models

    Liang Chen, Haozhe Zhao, Tianyu Liu, Shuai Bai, Junyang Lin, Chang Zhou, and Baobao Chang. An image is worth 1/2 tokens after layer 2: Plug-and-play inference acceleration for large vision-language models. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 19–35. Springer, 2024. 1, 2, 6

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Videollama 2: Advancing spatial- temporal modeling and audio understanding in video-llms

    Zesen Cheng, Sicong Leng, Hang Zhang, Yifei Xin, Xin Li, Guanzheng Chen, Yongxin Zhu, Wenqi Zhang, Ziyang Luo, Deli Zhao, et al. Videollama 2: Advancing spatial- temporal modeling and audio understanding in video-llms. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.07476, 2024. 2

    arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Instructblip: Towards general-purpose vision- language models with instruction tuning.Advances in neural information processing systems, 36:49250–49267, 2023

    Wenliang Dai, Junnan Li, Dongxu Li, Anthony Tiong, Junqi Zhao, Weisheng Wang, Boyang Li, Pascale N Fung, and Steven Hoi. Instructblip: Towards general-purpose vision- language models with instruction tuning.Advances in neural information processing systems, 36:49250–49267, 2023. 1

    2023

  7. [7]

    Video-mme: The first-ever comprehensive evaluation benchmark of multi-modal llms in video analysis

    Chaoyou Fu, Yuhan Dai, Yongdong Luo, Lei Li, Shuhuai Ren, Renrui Zhang, Zihan Wang, Chenyu Zhou, Yunhang Shen, Mengdan Zhang, et al. Video-mme: The first-ever comprehensive evaluation benchmark of multi-modal llms in video analysis. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 24108–24118, 2025. 6

    2025

  8. [8]

    Atten- tion score is not all you need for token importance indicator in kv cache reduction: Value also matters.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.12335, 2024

    Zhiyu Guo, Hidetaka Kamigaito, and Taro Watanabe. Atten- tion score is not all you need for token importance indicator in kv cache reduction: Value also matters.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.12335, 2024. 2

    arXiv 2024

Show all 34 references
  1. [9]

    Filter, correlate, compress: Training-free to- ken reduction for mllm acceleration.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.17686, 2024

    Yuhang Han, Xuyang Liu, Zihan Zhang, Pengxiang Ding, Donglin Wang, Honggang Chen, Qingsen Yan, and Siteng Huang. Filter, correlate, compress: Training-free to- ken reduction for mllm acceleration.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.17686, 2024. 2

    2024

  2. [10]

    Efficient multi- modal learning from data-centric perspective.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.11530, 2024

    Muyang He, Yexin Liu, Boya Wu, Jianhao Yuan, Yueze Wang, Tiejun Huang, and Bo Zhao. Efficient multi- modal learning from data-centric perspective.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.11530, 2024. 2

    2024 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Ivtp: Instruction-guided visual token pruning for large vision-language models

    Kai Huang, Hao Zou, Ye Xi, BoChen Wang, Zhen Xie, and Liang Yu. Ivtp: Instruction-guided visual token pruning for large vision-language models. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 214–230. Springer, 2024. 1

    2024

  4. [12]

    Fast pruning using principal components.Advances in neural information processing systems, 6, 1993

    Asriel Levin, Todd Leen, and John Moody. Fast pruning using principal components.Advances in neural information processing systems, 6, 1993. 3

    1993

  5. [13]

    Llava-onevision: Easy visual task transfer

    Bo Li, Yuanhan Zhang, Dong Guo, Renrui Zhang, Feng Li, Hao Zhang, Kaichen Zhang, Peiyuan Zhang, Yanwei Li, Zi- wei Liu, et al. Llava-onevision: Easy visual task transfer. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.03326, 2024. 1

    2024 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Llama-vid: An image is worth 2 tokens in large language models

    Yanwei Li, Chengyao Wang, and Jiaya Jia. Llama-vid: An image is worth 2 tokens in large language models. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 323–340. Springer, 2024. 2

    2024

  7. [15]

    Video-xl-pro: Reconstructive token compres- sion for extremely long video understanding.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.18478, 2025

    Xiangrui Liu, Yan Shu, Zheng Liu, Ao Li, Yang Tian, and Bo Zhao. Video-xl-pro: Reconstructive token compres- sion for extremely long video understanding.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.18478, 2025. 1, 2

    2025 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Video detail caption

    LMMs-Lab. Video detail caption. Dataset available at HuggingFace, 2024.https : / / huggingface . co / datasets/lmms-lab/VideoDetailCaption. 6

    2024

  9. [17]

    Haiquan Lu, Yefan Zhou, Shiwei Liu, Zhangyang Wang, Michael W Mahoney, and Yaoqing Yang. Alphapruning: Using heavy-tailed self regularization theory for improved layer-wise pruning of large language models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 37:9117–9152,

  10. [18]

    Video-chatgpt: Towards detailed video understanding via large vision and language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.05424, 2023

    Muhammad Maaz, Hanoona Rasheed, Salman Khan, and Fa- had Shahbaz Khan. Video-chatgpt: Towards detailed video understanding via large vision and language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.05424, 2023. 6

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Per- ception test: A diagnostic benchmark for multimodal video models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 36:42748–42761, 2023

    Viorica Patraucean, Lucas Smaira, Ankush Gupta, Adria Re- casens, Larisa Markeeva, Dylan Banarse, Skanda Koppula, Mateusz Malinowski, Yi Yang, Carl Doersch, et al. Per- ception test: A diagnostic benchmark for multimodal video models.Advances in Neural Information Processing S...

    2023

  12. [20]

    Llava-prumerge: Adaptive token reduction for efficient large multimodal models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.15388,

    Yuzhang Shang, Mu Cai, Bingxin Xu, Yong Jae Lee, and Yan Yan. Llava-prumerge: Adaptive token reduction for efficient large multimodal models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.15388,

  13. [21]

    Imp: Highly capable large multimodal models for mobile devices.IEEE Transactions on Multime- dia, 2025

    Zhenwei Shao, Zhou Yu, Jun Yu, Xuecheng Ouyang, Lihao Zheng, Zhenbiao Gai, Mingyang Wang, Zhenzhong Kuang, and Jiajun Ding. Imp: Highly capable large multimodal models for mobile devices.IEEE Transactions on Multime- dia, 2025. 2

    2025

  14. [22]

    Longvu: Spa- tiotemporal adaptive compression for long video-language understanding.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.17434, 2024

    Xiaoqian Shen, Yunyang Xiong, Changsheng Zhao, Lemeng Wu, Jun Chen, Chenchen Zhu, Zechun Liu, Fanyi Xiao, Bal- akrishnan Varadarajan, Florian Bordes, et al. Longvu: Spa- tiotemporal adaptive compression for long video-language understanding.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.17434, 2024. 2

    arXiv

  15. [23]

    Llava-mod: Making llava tiny via moe knowledge distillation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.15881,

    Fangxun Shu, Yue Liao, Le Zhuo, Chenning Xu, Lei Zhang, Guanghao Zhang, Haonan Shi, Long Chen, Tao Zhong, Wanggui He, et al. Llava-mod: Making llava tiny via moe knowledge distillation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.15881,

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    Llava-scissor: Token compression with semantic con- nected components for video llms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.21862, 2025

    Boyuan Sun, Jiaxing Zhao, Xihan Wei, and Qibin Hou. Llava-scissor: Token compression with semantic con- nected components for video llms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.21862, 2025. 1, 2, 3, 6

    2025 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Dynamic-vlm: Simple dynamic visual token compression 9 for videollm.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.09530, 2024

    Han Wang, Yuxiang Nie, Yongjie Ye, Deng GuanYu, Yanjie Wang, Shuai Li, Haiyang Yu, Jinghui Lu, and Can Huang. Dynamic-vlm: Simple dynamic visual token compression 9 for videollm.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.09530, 2024. 1, 2, 6

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Videollamb: Long-context video understanding with recur- rent memory bridges.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.01071,

    Yuxuan Wang, Cihang Xie, Yang Liu, and Zilong Zheng. Videollamb: Long-context video understanding with recur- rent memory bridges.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.01071,

    arXiv

  19. [27]

    Next-qa: Next phase of question-answering to explaining temporal actions

    Junbin Xiao, Xindi Shang, Angela Yao, and Tat-Seng Chua. Next-qa: Next phase of question-answering to explaining temporal actions. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF con- ference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 9777–9786, 2021. 6

    2021

  20. [28]

    Topv: Compatible token pruning with infer- ence time optimization for fast and low-memory multimodal vision language model

    Cheng Yang, Yang Sui, Jinqi Xiao, Lingyi Huang, Yu Gong, Chendi Li, Jinghua Yan, Yu Bai, Ponnuswamy Sadayappan, Xia Hu, et al. Topv: Compatible token pruning with infer- ence time optimization for fast and low-memory multimodal vision language model. InProceedings of the Compu...

    2025

  21. [29]

    Atp-llava: Adaptive token pruning for large vision language models

    Xubing Ye, Yukang Gan, Yixiao Ge, Xiao-Ping Zhang, and Yansong Tang. Atp-llava: Adaptive token pruning for large vision language models. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 24972– 24982, 2025. 1, 2

    2025

  22. [30]

    Video instruction tuning with synthetic data.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.02713, 2024

    Yuanhan Zhang, Jinming Wu, Wei Li, Bo Li, Zejun Ma, Zi- wei Liu, and Chunyuan Li. Video instruction tuning with synthetic data.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.02713, 2024. 1, 6

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Tinyllava: A frame- work of small-scale large multimodal models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.14289, 2024

    Baichuan Zhou, Ying Hu, Xi Weng, Junlong Jia, Jie Luo, Xien Liu, Ji Wu, and Lei Huang. Tinyllava: A frame- work of small-scale large multimodal models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.14289, 2024. 2

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Internvl3: Exploring advanced training and test-time recipes for open-source multimodal models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.10479, 2025

    Jinguo Zhu, Weiyun Wang, Zhe Chen, Zhaoyang Liu, Shen- glong Ye, Lixin Gu, Hao Tian, Yuchen Duan, Weijie Su, Jie Shao, et al. Internvl3: Exploring advanced training and test-time recipes for open-source multimodal models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.10479, 2025. 1, 6 10 Adaptive ...

    2025 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Also, we use beam size of 1, and the number of maximum new to- kens is capped to 1024

    Hyperparameters for Our Method For generation with all methods, we select the token with highest probability score from the LLM output. Also, we use beam size of 1, and the number of maximum new to- kens is capped to 1024. A total of 64 frames were sampled from the videos for ...

  26. [34]

    Prompt Used for Evaluation We queried the LLM Claude Sonnet 3.7 with the fol- lowing prompt to evaluate the generated response from VLMs. This prompt is copied from the LLaV A-NeXT repo (https://github.com/LLaV A-VL/LLaV A-NeXT): You are an intelligent chatbot designed for eva...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.