Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have significantly advanced video reasoning, yet Video Question Answering (VideoQA) remains challenging due to its demand for temporal causal reasoning and evidence-grounded answer generation. Prevailing end-to-end MLLM frameworks lack explicit structured reasoning between visual perception and answer derivation, causing severe hallucinations and poor interpretability. Existing methods also fail to address three core gaps: faithful visual clue extraction, utility-aware clue filtering, and end-to-end clue-answer alignment. Inspired by hierarchical human visual cognition, we propose ClueNet, a clue-aware video reasoning framework with a two-stage supervised fine-tuning paradigm without extensive base model modifications. Decoupled supervision aligns clue extraction and chain-based reasoning, while inference supervision with an adaptive clue filter refines high-order reasoning, alongside lightweight modules for efficient inference. Experiments on NExT-QA, STAR, and MVBench show that ClueNet outperforms state-of-the-art methods by ≥ 1.1%, with superior generalization, hallucination mitigation, inference efficiency, and cross-backbone compatibility. This work bridges the perception-to-generation gap in MLLM video understanding, providing an interpretable, faithful reasoning paradigm for high-stakes VideoQA applications.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overall framework of the proposed ClueNet, which mimics the hierarchical human visual cognitive process to enable explicit clue-aware video reasoning.
Figure 2: MLLM attention heatmaps and paired VideoQA results: misaligned attention strongly correlates with incorrect answers, confirming visual perception bias.
Figure 3: Intermediate layers top-probability output token visualization: erroneous visual clue semantic interpretation in intermediate layers propagates to hallucinated reasoning and incorrect final answers, confirming clue cognition bias.
Figure 5: Overview of our two-stage training scheme.
Figure 6: Refining clues and visual information during the training and inference stages.
Model
STAR
NExT-QA
Int
Seq
Pred
Feas
Tot
Cau
Tem
Des
Tot
Closed-source MLLMs
GPT-4o
66.5
75.3
70.2
67.1
71.1
80.1
73.8
84.7
78.9
Qwen-VL-Max
67.6
74.5
67.3
65.8
70.7
79.7
74.1
84.3
78.7
Open-source MLLMs
LongVA [ 53 ]
50.2
54.5
57.2
54.3
53.3
56.9
62.8
65.8
60.2
Table 1: SOTA method comparison on STAR and NExT-QA: multiple-choice task accuracy ( % ). Best and second-best results are bolded and underlined . Total (Tot) denotes the overall accuracy over all test samples.
Table 2: Evaluation on the NExT-OE generative task using WUPS. Best and second-best results are bolded and underlined .
Model
Avg
AS
AP
AA
FA
UA
OE
OI
OS
MD
AL
ST
AC
MC
MA
SC
FP
CO
EN
ER
CI
Closed-source MLLMs
GPT-4o
60.8
65.5
75.5
82.5
48.5
83.5
69.5
72.0
37.5
46.0
41.5
90.0
49.0
46.0
70.5
57.5
47.5
72.0
41.0
59.5
61.0
Qwen-VL-Max
61.4
64.5
77.0
82.0
50.0
85.5
74.0
75.5
36.0
52.0
33.5
91.0
47.0
54.5
64.5
61.0
46.5
74.0
45.0
62.5
51.5
Open-source MLLMs
Cos
49.6
57.5
58.0
57.0
44.0
69.0
50.5
61.0
32.0
37.5
35.0
86.5
48.5
27.5
58.0
47.5
44.5
58.5
39.5
57.0
42.0
LongVA
49.4
53.5
59.0
67.0
43.5
67.5
50.0
59.0
33.0
35.0
33.0
85.5
50.5
30.0
58.5
49.5
43.5
59.0
39.0
51.0
41.0
Table 3: Evaluation on the MVBench benchmark. Best and second-best results are bolded and underlined , respectively. ClueNet achieves the highest average score, excelling particularly in fine-grained temporal and object interaction tasks.
Components
Benchmarks
Inference
Stage 1
Stage 2
KS
ACF
VC
STAR
NExT-QA
Time (s)
GFLOPs
-
-
-
-
-
72.1
81.3
-
-
✓
-
-
-
-
70.8 (-1.3)
80.6 (-0.7)
6.5060
54,197.96
✓
✓
-
-
-
75.1 (+3.0)
83.3 (+2.0)
5.9963
54,026.85
✓
✓
✓
-
-
75.4 (+3.3)
83.4 (+2.1)
6.0443
54,075.02
✓
✓
✓
✓
-
77.6 (+5.5)
84.3 (+3.0)
4.9963
51,355.89
Table 4: ClueNet ablation on STAR and NExT-QA; deltas relative to Row 1 (VideoLLaMA3 [ 51 ] ) baseline. Row 1 inference time omitted (different pipeline).
Figure 7: Oracle experiment results on STAR. Striped and gridded bars denote standard and oracle inference.