Despite advances in the application of MLLMs for various video tasks, video event prediction (VEP) remains relatively underexplored. VEP requires the model to perform fine-grained temporal modeling of videos and establish logical relationships between videos and future events, which current MLLMs still struggle with. In this work, we first present a comprehensive evaluation of current leading MLLMs on the VEP task, revealing the reasons behind their inaccurate predictions, including lack of logical reasoning ability for future events prediction and insufficient utilization of visual information. To address these challenges, we propose Chain of Events (CoE) paradigm, which constructs temporal event chains to implicitly enforce MLLM focusing on the visual content and the logical connections between videos and future events, incentivizing model's reasoning capability with multiple training protocols. Experimental results on public benchmarks demonstrate that our method outperforms both leading open-source and commercial MLLMs, establishing a new state-of-the-art on the VEP task. Codes and models will be released soon.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Analysis of open-source MLLMs on video event prediction tasks. Fig. 1(a) illustrates the reasoning process, indicating the lack of logical reasoning capabilities in VEP task. Fig. 1(b) illustrates the attention distribution of the option tokens over input tokens demonstrating the insufficient utilization of visual information.
Figure 2: An illustration of our proposed CoE-SFT method within Qwen2.5-VL-72B. We provide the larger model with the video and the future event, and prompt it to generate the intermediate logical reasoning process that connects them. Training on such data encourages the model to develop logical reasoning abilities rather than relying on option-based analysis.
Figure 3: An illustration of our proposed CoE-GRPO method. The overall supervision signal consists of three components: re encourages the model to follow the CoE reasoning paradigm and constrains the CoE length; rs supervises the alignment between event timestamps and textual descriptions while preventing reward hacking; and ra provides verifiable reward signals. The scissor icon indicates the temporal segmentation of video clips based on timestamps.
Model
Method
Frames
Futurebench ↑
1-Hop
2-Hop
3-Hop
Interp.
AVG
GLM-4.1V-9B [ 42 ]
Vanilla
32
29.9
41.9
52.2
47.3
44.38
LLavA-NeXT-Video [ 61 ]
32
48.8
49.3
40.0
44.4
45.24
Kimi-VL-A3B [ 40 ]
32
44.3
42.8
51.3
51.9
48.87
MiMo-VL-7B [ 54 ]
32
59.0
59.6
50.5
43.8
50.45
InternVL3-8B [ 46 ]
32
54.3
58.0
63.2
54.4
56.72
Table 1: Evaluation results of open-source/commercial MLLMs and our proposed CoE on FutureBench [ 43 ] .
Method
Verb (Test / Val) ↑
Noun (Test / Val) ↑
Action (Test / Val) ↑
Precision
Recall
F1-Score
Precision
Recall
F1-Score
LLaVA-Video-7B [ 62 ]
5.67 / 6.27
44.50 / 44.96
41.95 / 41.64
43.19 / 43.24
3.13 / 3.57
2.95 / 3.30
3.04 / 3.43
Kimi-VL-A3B
5.12 / 5.30
31.79 / 31.46
36.43 / 37.04
33.95 / 34.02
2.40 / 2.83
3.27 / 3.16
2.77 / 2.99
InternVL3-8B
5.80 / 7.00
48.77 / 43.64
45.77 / 37.94
47.22 / 40.59
3.37 / 3.60
3.23 / 3.07
3.30 / 3.31
GLM-4.1V-9B
9.10 / 10.62
33.80 / 34.94
33.66 / 35.42
33.73 / 35.18
3.01 / 3.27
3.02 / 3.34
3.01 / 3.30
MiMo-VL-7B
10.23 / 9.57
43.46 / 39.54
32.07 / 35.10
36.91 / 37.19
6.96 / 5.54
5.08 / 3.86
5.87 / 4.55
Table 2: Evaluation results of open-source MLLMs and our proposed CoE on AVEP [ 39 ] .
Figure 4: Attention difference of visual tokens between different methods and the base model. Portions greater than 0 indicate an improvement in attention.
Method
SFT
CoT
GRPO
CoE-GRPO
CoE-SFT
Baseline
Qwen2.5-VL-7B-Instruct
WR ↑
0.32
0.44
0.59
0.77
0.93
IR(%) ↑
-3.33
+1.08
+1.47
+9.20
+15.11
Table 3: Attention variation of visual tokens. WR (Winning Rate) denotes the overall percentage of samples showing attention improvement compared to the base model, while IR (Improvement Rate) indicates the average numerical increase in attention weight compared to the base model.
Method
CoE-SFT
CoE-GRPO
Instruct
SFT
GRPO
WR(%) ↑
38.13
32.42
16.21
7.88
5.37
Table 4: The results of judge evaluation of different method. WR represents the ratio of samples where the model’s answers are more reasonable and accurate compared to other models.
Item
1-Hop
2-Hop
3-Hop
Interp.
AVG
Visual Attention Enhancement Methods
Prompt-guided
44.5
46.6
43.8
46.6
45.74
Constant-Bias
54.6
52.3
57.6
50.6
52.57
CoE (Ours)
80.9
83.9
71.6
71.4
75.00
Group Size G
G=2
57.8
64.8
60.7
59.9
60.61
Table 5: The results of the ablation studies.
Figure 5: The training curves of CoE-GRPO.
Model
FutureBench ↑
AVEP ↑
AVG
Verb
Noun-F1
Action-F1
VideoChat-R1
46.59
8.31
42.22
3.95
Video-R1
67.47
9.47
47.04
4.32
Ours
75.00
18.75
64.03
9.88
EventFormer*
-
22.71
46.24
7.69
Table 6: Additional results, *denotes traditional method.
Figure 6: The data scaling curve of CoE
Figure 7: An example of judge model evaluation.
Figure 8: An example of CoE paradigm.
Figure 9: An example of CoE paradigm.
Figure 10: An example of CoE paradigm.
Figure 11: An example of CoE paradigm.
Figure 12: An example of CoE paradigm.
Figure 13: An example of CoE paradigm.
Figure 14: A bad case of CoE paradigm.
Figure 15: A bad case of CoE paradigm.
Figure 16: Some examples of attention differences comparing to the vanilla model.
Figure 17: Prompt template for training and inference.
Figure 18: Prompt template for CoE-SFT data generation and judge model evaluation.
Video event prediction (VEP) requires models to infer unobserved future states from partial video evidence. Existing video MLLMs usually verbalize intermediate future reasoning in text space: once visual evidence is verbalized, fine-grained motion, geometry, and interaction cues can be lost, leading to plausible but visually ungrounded hallucinations. We introduce Future-L1, an interleaved latent visual reasoning framework that lets an MLLM alternate between language tokens and continuous latent visual spans during autoregressive decoding. To train this capability, we construct Future-L1-50K by selecting examples where future visual hints help prediction and align latent states to future-frame embeddings, then further optimize sampled latent trajectories with LA-DAPO, a latent-aware RL objective with outcome-contrastive and temporal-diversity rewards. Future-L1 achieves new state-of-the-art results on both benchmarks: on FutureBench, it improves Qwen3-VL-8B from 61.0 to 85.4 and exceeds the previous best Video-CoE by 10.4 points; on TwiFF-Bench, it improves the average score from 2.44 to 3.04. These results suggest that future-oriented video reasoning benefits from preserving intermediate visual semantics in latent space rather than translating every reasoning step into text.
Tianxiang Jiang, Linquan Wu, Sheng Xia +5
University of Science and Technology of China · Shanghai AI Laboratory · City University of Hong Kong +4
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have demonstrated remarkable potential in video understanding, yet their reliance on retrospective summarization and text-centric priors often limits their ability to bridge unobserved causal transitions when applied to Video Event Prediction (VEP). To address this, we propose VepAgent, an agentic framework that integrates causal-transition reasoning with tool-augmented reinforcement learning (RL) for robust VEP. Unlike prior methods that passively project future trajectories from historical dependencies, our approach explicitly models the logical progression from terminal observed states to future events. Specifically, we first construct futurebench-4K, a high-quality chain-of-thought dataset for supervised fine-tuning (SFT) that effectively bridges the causal-logic gap by structuring the deduction of unobserved intermediate states. Subsequently, we develop a diagnostic tool library integrating state tracking, frame retrieval, and region magnification, enabling the agent to dynamically augment reasoning with external tools to recover missing spatio-temporal evidence and resolve visual ambiguities during inference. Moreover, we propose a composite reward mechanism that jointly optimizes prediction accuracy, causal coherence, and reliable prior, compelling the agent to rely on genuine visual grounding rather than superficial textual similarities. Extensive evaluations on FutureBench and NEPBench datasets demonstrate that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance, significantly outperforming larger MLLMs and validating the empirical effectiveness of our agentic, future-oriented reasoning paradigm.
Qiutong Chen, Yuchan Guo, Zhenlong Yuan +10
Nankai University · Carnegie Mellon University · Xiaohongshu Inc. +4
A key capability for video understanding is reliably linking subjects to events across time, yet whether Video Large Language Models (VideoLLMs) actually achieve this remains unclear. In this work, we introduce DistractionBench to evaluate whether VideoLLMs can robustly link subjects and events in the presence of unrelated video segments. Through controlled interventions, such as inserting short advertisement clips into longer videos, we show that VideoLLMs frequently hallucinate interactions between entities from different segments, incorrectly attributing actions from injected advertisements to subjects in the main video. We characterize this systematic hallucination as bag-of-events (BoE) behavior, where models process videos as collections of events rather than temporally structured sequences. Evaluating 11 popular VideoLLMs, we find that all models exhibit substantial BoE behavior. Our findings suggest that VideoLLMs lack reliable mechanisms for temporal grounding and motivate the development of models with more robust subject-event association.
Oscar Chew, Serhii Honcharenko, Qian-Hui Chen +4
Texas A&M University · National Taiwan University · Stanford University +1