Scaling multimodal large language models (MLLMs) to long videos is constrained by limited context windows. While retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is a promising remedy by organizing query-relevant visual evidence into a compact context, most existing methods (i) flatten videos into independent segments, breaking their inherent spatio-temporal structure, and (ii) depend on explicit semantic matching, which can miss cues that are implicitly relevant to the query's intent. To overcome these limitations, we propose VideoStir, a structured and intent-aware long-video RAG framework. It firstly structures a video as a spatio-temporal graph at clip level, and then performs multi-hop retrieval to aggregate evidence across distant yet contextually related events. Furthermore, it introduces an MLLM-backed intent-relevance scorer that retrieves frames based on their alignment with the query's reasoning intent. To support this capability, we curate IR-600K, a large-scale dataset tailored for learning frame-query intent alignment. Experiments show that VideoStir is competitive with state-of-the-art baselines without relying on auxiliary information, highlighting the promise of shifting long-video RAG from flattened semantic matching to structured, intent-aware reasoning. Codes and checkpoints are available at https://github.com/RomGai/VideoStir.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Paradigm shift from flat semantic matching to structured, intent-aware long-video RAG. (Top) Semantic-based retrieval relies on explicit semantic overlap, often missing cues that are only implicitly relevant to the query intent. (Middle) Intent-aware retrieval utilizes MLLM’s reasoning capability to identify cues that may be relevant to the query intent (detailed in Sec. 3.4 ); however, it can be distracted by noisy cues when operating over flattened contexts scattered across long temporal ranges. (Bottom) VideoStir structures the video as a spatio-temporal graph to retrieve cues from coherent contexts, enabling more reliable evidence aggregation. We further discuss the benefits of structured retrieval in Fig. 3 .
Figure 2: Overview of VideoStir. VideoStir achieves long-video understanding via spatio-temporal structuring and two-stage retrieval. (a) Spatio-Temporal Topology Modeling. An event boundary detector segments input video into semantically coherent clips. Their embeddings are used to construct a spatio-temporal graph with temporal edges linking adjacent clips and spatial edges weighted by inter-clip similarity. (b) Graph-based Clip Retrieval . Input query is embedded in the video-language space to retrieve top- N matched anchor nodes; multi-hop traversal then expands along spatio-temporal links under hop-distance and edge-weight constraints to aggregate contextual clips. (c) Intent-aware Frame Retrieval. Frames densely sampled from the retrieved clips are assessed by an intent-relevance scorer (LoRA-tuned on IR-600K), which outputs a probability distribution over discrete relevance levels. These distributions are then aggregated via probability-weighted expectation to produce a continuous relevance score; high-scoring, intent-aligned frames are retained and fed to a downstream MLLM to produce the final answer.
Model
Native Input
LV-Bench (Val)
MLVU
Video-MME-Long (w/o Sub)
Overall ↑
Gain (%) ↑
Overall ↑
Gain (%) ↑
Overall ↑
Gain (%) ↑
LLaVA-Video (7B)
✓
56.6
-
70.8
-
-
-
+ Video-RAG
✗
58.7
3.7
72.4
2.3
-
-
+ TV-RAG
✗
58.8
2.1
72.1
1.8
-
-
+ VideoStir (Ours)
✓
60.3
6.5
73.1
3.2
-
-
mPLUG-Owl3 (8B)
✓
52.1
-
63.7
-
50.1
-
Table 1: Comparison with long-video RAG baselines. “Native Input” indicates whether the model processes video directly without relying on external auxiliary text or tools. Bold and underlined numbers indicate the best and second-best accuracies, respectively. ‘–’ indicates not applicable.
(M)LLM Backbone
Method
Overall ↑
Methods with Video-to-Text Tools
GPT-3.5
LLoVi [ 32 ]
57.6
DrVideo [ 25 ]
62.6
GPT-4
VideoAgent [ 33 ]
60.2
LLoVi [ 32 ]
61.2
VidAgent [ 34 ]
62.8
Table 2: System-level comparison on EgoSchema’s test set with SOTA methods built upon fixed (M)LLMs. These approaches can be categorized into two groups: one employs video-to-text tools (e.g., captioners or object detectors) to provide auxiliary textual inputs for downstream (M)LLMs, while the other leverages the native multimodal understanding capability (Native Input) of MLLMs without auxiliary text. Bold and underlined numbers indicate the best and second-best accuracies, respectively. ‘–’ indicates not applicable.
Method
Overall ↑
Retrieval Acc. ↑
w/o Intent-relevance Scorer
+ CLIP L/14
52.8
69.2
+ Video-CLIP
56.3
75.4
+ PE
58.1
79.8
w/o Weighted Expectation
54.2
71.6
w/o Event-Boundary Detector
62.3
88.2
Table 3: Component-level ablations on the expanded 1k validation set. “Overall” denotes overall accuracy, and “Retrieval Acc.” measures the accuracy of successfully retrieving key cues. “w/o Intent-relevance Scorer” replaces the scorer with similarity-based frame retrieval; “w/o Weighted Expectation” replaces probability-weighted expectation with discrete scores; “w/o Spatio-Temporal Graph” disables structured retrieval, which bypasses the graph and directly selects the top-14 clips by PE-embedding similarity, following the best-performing setting in Table 6 . Bold indicates the best results.
Embedding Backbone
Overall ↑
Retrieval Acc. ↑
Video-CLIP [ 17 ]
62.1
88.3
X-CLIP [ 18 ]
62.8
89.4
PE [ 19 ]
64.5
92.2
Table 4: Ablations of VideoStir’s video-language embedding backbones with N=1000 . “Overall” denotes overall accuracy, and “Retrieval Acc.” refers to the accuracy of successfully retrieving the key evidence for answering the query. The bold numbers represent the best results.
Base Model
Method
IR-600K CE ↓
LV-Bench CE ↓
Overall ↑
Retrieval Acc. ↑
Trainable Params ↓
Teacher Models
InternVL2.5-78B
Zero-Shot
-
-
64.8
92.6
-
Qwen2.5-VL-72B
Zero-Shot
-
-
65.4
95.8
-
Qwen2-VL-72B
Zero-Shot
-
-
64.9
94.7
-
Student Models
InternVL2.5-4B
Zero-Shot
8.8755
8.9423
59.3
82.1
-
Table 5: Ablations on the intent-relevant scorer’s distillation strategies. “IR-600K CE” and “LV-Bench CE” denote the cross-entropy loss computed on the corresponding datasets. To reduce distributional bias, the student model is distilled using teacher models from the same family. “Retrieval Acc.” refers to the accuracy of successfully retrieving the key evidence.
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 3: Advantages of structured retrieval over flat clip retrieval. Flattened retrieval mainly returns clips with explicit semantic overlap with the query, while overlooking clips that are contextually relevant but do not contain direct query-matching content. VideoStir structures long videos to reconstruct spatio-temporal context, allowing multi-hop traversal to aggregate contextually related clips around key moments. The resulting evidence is cleaner and more coherent, providing stronger support for subsequent fine-grained retrieval.
Hyperparameter
Value
Avg. Clips
Retrieval Acc. ↑
Number of Anchors ( N ) (Fixed L=2,η=0.6 )
1
7.2
88.0
2
13.6
92.0
3
21.9
90.5
4
25.4
90.0
Hop Distance ( L ) (Fixed N=2,η=0.6 )
1
8.4
87.0
2
13.6
92.0
Appendix
Table 6: Hyperparameter ablations on Graph-based Clip Retrieval. We investigate the impact of the number of anchors N , hop distance L , and spatial edge threshold η . “Avg. Clips” denotes the average number of retrieved clips per query. The bold numbers represent the best results.
Figure 4: Distribution of Intent Relevance Scores across the IR-600K training and validation sets. The results demonstrate that the validation set maintains a consistent class distribution with the training set across all relevance levels.
Current large video-language models (LVLMs) still face challenges when dealing with long videos, mainly because frames are often processed independently, making it difficult to capture temporal dependencies across events. Although retrieval-augmented approaches have been introduced to provide additional context, most of them operate at the frame or snippet level, which limits their ability to model how events evolve over time and relate to each other. In this paper, we propose Event Chain Retrieval-Augmented Generation (EC-RAG), a training-free framework that organizes video content into an explicit event chain before question answering. Instead of retrieving isolated frames or text segments, EC-RAG first partitions the video into semantically coherent segments, represents each segment using multi-modal signals, and then links them into a structured chain that preserves temporal order and captures inter-event relationships. Given a query, the system identifies relevant events within this chain and gathers supporting evidence from the associated modalities. Our approach offers several practical advantages: (i) event-level abstraction that better reflects how video content is naturally structured, enabling more reliable localization compared to frame-level retrieval; (ii) structured multi-modal fusion that aggregates speech, text, and visual cues at the event level, allowing complementary information to be more effectively utilized during reasoning; and (iii) plug-and-play compatibility with existing LVLM backbones, requiring no additional training or reliance on proprietary models. Experiments on Video-MME, MLVU, and LongVideoBench show that this event-centric design consistently outperforms frame-level retrieval baselines, highlighting the importance of modeling temporal structure for long-video understanding.
Yuhao Qin, Junbo Wang, Yuke Li +1
Northwestern Polytechnical University Xi’an, China
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have made strong progress in video understanding, yet long videos remain difficult: the visual token budget grows with video length, so temporally sparse evidence is easily lost. Existing methods compress the input through uniform sampling or frame selection, but these strategies optimize different objectives, either broad temporal coverage or local question relevance, and neither preserves both global storyline context and fine-grained evidence. We propose VideoRouter (VR), which rethinks long-video understanding as coordinating complementary evidence views rather than selecting a single subset of frames. VideoRouter first organizes each video into a question-agnostic temporal hierarchy that partitions it into coarse-to-fine temporally coherent segments. Upper-level nodes capture broad storyline context and event progression, while lower-level nodes preserve fine-grained local details and evidence-bearing moments. This gives rise to two complementary views: a global view for coverage-oriented reasoning and a local view for detail-oriented evidence recovery. We further introduce a verification-guided router that judges which view is better supported by its own selected evidence and decides the final answer. Across six backbones, routing improves over both views in all settings, and the choice of view is shown to be dataset-dependent, confirming that no single evidence granularity is universally preferable. On VideoMME, our method outperforms state-of-the-art frame selection methods by 2.5 points, under the LLaVA-Video-7B backbone. We will release the code.
This paper addresses the critical and underexplored challenge of long video understanding with low computational budgets. We propose LongVideo-R1, an active, reasoning-equipped multimodal large language model (MLLM) agent designed for efficient video context navigation, avoiding the redundancy of exhaustive search. At the core of LongVideo-R1 lies a reasoning module that leverages high-level visual cues to infer the most informative video clip for subsequent processing. During inference, the agent initiates traversal from top-level visual summaries and iteratively refines its focus, immediately halting the exploration process upon acquiring sufficient knowledge to answer the query. To facilitate training, we first extract hierarchical video captions from CGBench, a video corpus with grounding annotations, and guide GPT-5 to generate 33K high-quality chain-of-thought-with-tool trajectories. The LongVideo-R1 agent is fine-tuned upon the Qwen-3-8B model through a two-stage paradigm: supervised fine-tuning (SFT) followed by reinforcement learning (RL), where RL employs a specifically designed reward function to maximize selective and efficient clip navigation. Experiments on multiple long video benchmarks validate the effectiveness of name, which enjoys superior tradeoff between QA accuracy and efficiency. All curated data and source code are provided in the supplementary material and will be made publicly available. Code and data are available at: https://github.com/qiujihao19/LongVideo-R1
Jihao Qiu, Lingxi Xie, Xinyue Huo +2
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences · Huawei Consumer Business Group