cs.CVSep 1, 2025

TempCore: Are Video QA Benchmarks Temporally Grounded?

Authors: Hyunjong OkJaeho Lee

Abstract

Vision-language models (VLMs) can ingest only a limited number of video frames, making frame selection a practical necessity. But do current Video QA benchmarks genuinely require temporal frame selection, or can most questions be answered regardless of which frames are shown? We introduce Frame Selection Sensitivity (FSS), a per-sample diagnostic that measures how much VLM accuracy changes when the most relevant frames are replaced with the least relevant ones. Across six benchmarks and eight VLMs, we find that a large majority of samples are frame-agnostic: only a minority are genuinely sensitive to frame choice. Combining FSS with a Language Independence Score (LIS) reveals that merely 5.5--31% of samples are Temporally Sensitive. We construct TempCore, compact evaluation subsets that isolate these temporal samples from existing benchmarks, and will release code and per-sample annotations upon publication.

Explore similar work

Jul 14, 2026cs.CV

What Does a Temporal Benchmark Score Measure? Decomposing Channel Use in Video VLM Evaluation

A score on a temporal video question answering benchmark is meant to measure that a model has temporal understanding, but it conflates two questions. 1. The task question: is the question even temporal, does it need several frames and their order? and 2. The channel question, when it does, does the model recover the order from the pixels, or read it off the positional encoding (RoPE)? Most of a temporal score answers neither, a single frame and answer priors often carry it. The field's validity checks, frame-shuffle sensitivity and the accuracy gained from the full video, speak only to the task question. We contribute a label-free screen for the channel question, the reversal-drop: the accuracy lost when the visual sequence is reversed while RoPE remains forward. It can be applied to compatible temporal benchmarks without new annotations. Paired reverse labels, or tasks whose labels transform deterministically under reversal, distinguish models that follow reversed content from those merely disrupted by the conflict. Molmo2 answers the forward event reading order off positions, while Qwen3-VL answers the reversed event it actually sees, reading visual order (comparatively). We call them position-dominant and visual-sequence-dominant. The split holds across two benchmarks and several temporal tasks at two scales, and activation patching shows it is a real internal property, not an artifact of the conflict. The distinction matters, the two channels fail on opposite inputs so two models with similar score are not interchangable, i.e. an aggregate score does not reflect potential failure modes.
Farrukh Rahman
Jun 1, 2026cs.CV

Moment-Video: Diagnosing Temporal Fidelity of Video MLLMs on Momentary Visual Events

Video multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have made rapid progress on general and long-form video understanding, yet their ability to preserve brief answer-critical visual evidence remains underexplored. Many practical questions are determined by momentary visual events: localized actions or state transitions that may last only a few frames. Such evidence can be skipped by sparse frame sampling, suppressed by visual-token compression, or diluted by coarse temporal aggregation, causing failures that language-side reasoning cannot reliably recover. We introduce Moment-Video, a benchmark for diagnosing the temporal fidelity of video MLLMs through momentary visual event understanding. Each question is grounded in a localized, visually observable, and sampling-sensitive event, requiring models to notice, count, describe, or reason about transient evidence rather than rely on persistent objects, global scene context, or language priors. Moment-Video contains 1,000 human-verified video-QA pairs across 7 domains and 25 fine-grained subcategories, covering four task types: Temporal Occurrence, Temporal Counting, Action Description, and Temporal Reasoning. We evaluate 33 proprietary and open-source MLLMs on Moment-Video. The best-performing model, Seed-2.0-Pro, achieves only 39.6% overall accuracy, while most open-source models remain below 25%, revealing a substantial gap in momentary visual event understanding. Diagnostic analyses show that denser frame sampling improves some models but does not eliminate the bottleneck, and longer videos introduce stronger temporal-localization challenges. These findings suggest that current video MLLMs still lack temporally faithful representations for capturing, preserving, and using brief but decisive visual evidence.
Xiaolin Liu, Yilun Zhu, Xiangyu Zhao +9
Jun 23, 2026cs.CV

ViTexQA: A Multi-Frame Temporal Perception Dataset for Video Text Question Answering

Despite remarkable progress in multimodal understanding, current MLLMs still exhibit limitations in video text understanding, particularly when semantics emerge through the integration of temporally distributed textual cues across multiple frames. This perception challenge fundamentally differs from static image text understanding, yet existing datasets fail to capture: the vast majority of questions remain answerable from single frames, inadequately reflecting real-world video text comprehension demands. To address this, we present ViTexQA, a large-scale video-text QA dataset, and FrameThinker for robust multi-frame temporal reasoning. We build ViTexQA via a quality-controlled Chain-of-Thought (CoT) annotation pipeline boosted with temporal constraints; all its QA pairs demand cross-frame text fusion to solve, enforcing true temporal reliance. FrameThinker adopts two-stage training for explicit temporal modeling: CoT-Guided Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) generates frame-aware reasoning chains, followed by Temporally-grounded Reinforcement Learning (RL) optimized with multi-frame coherence rewards. Evaluations show our method outperforms SOTA baselines on ViTexQA, lifting ROUGE-L by 6.3%.
Zhentao Guo, Chen Duan, Tongkun Guan +3