Learning Consistent Temporal Grounding between Related Tasks in Sports Coaching
Organizations: University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh PA 15260, USA
Abstract
Video-LLMs often attend to irrelevant frames, which is especially detrimental for sports coaching tasks requiring precise temporal grounding. Yet obtaining frame-level supervision is challenging: expensive to collect from humans and unreliable from other models. We improve temporal grounding without additional annotations by exploiting the observation that related tasks, such as generation and verification, must attend to the same frames. We enforce this via a self-consistency objective over select visual attention maps of tightly-related tasks. Using VidDiffBench, which provides ground-truth keyframe annotations, we first validate that attention misallocation is a significant bottleneck. We then show that training with our objective yields gains of +3.0%, +14.1% accuracy and +0.9 BERTScore over supervised finetuning across three sports coaching tasks: Exact, FitnessQA, and ExpertAF, even surpassing closed-source models.
Figures & tables
| Head Selection | Redistribution | Accuracy |
| Manual Head Selection (layer=8, head=7) | ||
| None | None | 65.8 |
| None | Uniform over all frames | 68.4 |
| None | Proportional over keyframes | 71.8 |
| Adaptive Head Selection (layer=8) | ||
| Top- vis. attention sum | Proportional over keyframes | 69.2 |
| Method | Exact | FitnessQA | ExpertAF |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gemini-3-Flash | 79.0 | 54.2 | – |
| Qwen2.5-VL-7B-Instruct | – | 33.3* | 27.3 |
| Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct | 40.2 | 55.4* | 27.1 |
| PerceptionLM-8B | 27.1 | 39.5 | 26.0 |
| PerceptionLM-8B (Finetuned) | 84.5 | 74.1 | 37.5 |
| +Ours | 87.5 | 88.2 | 38.4 |
| Verif. Layer | Head Matching Strategy | Exact | FitnessQA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fixed ( ) | Ex. Match + Hung. (ours) | 87.5 | 88.2 |
| Fixed ( ) | Ex. Match + Random | 83.0 | 85.4 |
| Fixed ( ) | Ex. Match + Discard | 82.5 | 81.3 |
| Flexible | Hung. only | 83.0 | 87.7 |
| Verif. Summ. | Ex. Match + Hung. | 69.5 | 83.6 |
| Example 1 | Example 2 | |
| Question | Is the user’s movement sufficient during shoulder gators? | While performing plank taps on their knees, are the user’s hips elevated? |
| Reference | Yes, the movement is insufficient. | No, the user’s hips are not elevated. |
| A | The movement is excessive. | The user’s hips are significantly elevated. |
| B | The movement is insufficient. ✓ | The user’s hips are slightly elevated. |
| C | The movement is appropriate. | The user’s hips are not elevated. ✓ |
| D | The movement is too slow. | The user’s hips are at an appropriate height. |
| SG Direction | Exact | FitnessQA | ExpertAF |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ours (verification fixed) | 87.5 | 88.2 | 38.4 |
| Generation fixed (no on verif) | 0.0 | 2.7 | -4.0 |
| Generation fixed (w/ on verif) | 1.0 | 0.0 | 16.1 |
| Sport | Reference | Finetuned baseline | Ours |
|---|---|---|---|
| Soccer | The player’s kicking technique needs improvement, especially the follow-through and body alignment to maximize power, control, and accuracy. | The player’s footwork and body position are affecting the quality of the pass. | The player shows good approach technique to the ball, but needs to improve follow-through and body positioning for maximum power and accuracy. |
| Climbing | The climber is attempting a dynamic move that involves cutting his feet loose and supporting his weight with his arms, which is a challenging and uncertain approach. | The climber’s footwork is not ideal; he should use his left foot to drive upward and bring his right foot back onto the hold. | The climber successfully executed a dynamic move, starting from a good position with effective foot placement to reach the next hold. |
Temporal Video Grounding
Temporal video grounding locates the moments in a video that match a natural-language query, enabling precise search and evidence-based understanding.
See all 166 papers