cs.CVJul 14, 2026

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

Authors: Farrukh Rahman

Organizations: Microsoft · Georgia Institute of Technology

Abstract

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.

Explore similar work

Sep 1, 2025cs.CV

TempCore: Are Video QA Benchmarks Temporally Grounded?

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.
Hyunjong Ok, Jaeho Lee
Sep 1, 2026cs.CV

TempCloze: Can Video-LLMs Identify the Missing Middle?

Temporal reasoning benchmarks for Video-LLMs are often mediated by language, leaving room for linguistic shortcuts from option wording, answer correlations, or language priors. To reduce such shortcuts, we introduce TempCloze, a video cloze benchmark for evaluating visual temporal reasoning in Video-LLMs. Given the beginning and ending clips of a video, models must identify the true missing middle from four candidates. TempCloze contains 1,521 carefully filtered videos from seven sources, mainly long-take and egocentric videos. We construct same-source distractors along three dimensions: Semantic asks what event should happen, Alignment probes when it should occur, and Progression tests how it should unfold, while shared scenes and objects reduce appearance cues. Our evaluation of 10 proprietary and 21 open-source Video-LLMs reveals Alignment as the primary bottleneck: models often recognize plausible semantic content and local event progression but struggle with temporal alignment. We further conduct error pattern and behavioral sensitivity analyses on TempCloze-Mixed and TempCloze-Hard with four representative models to examine where errors arise and how candidate order, context direction, visible span, frame density, and test-time scaling influence model choices.
Wenqi Pei, Henry Hengyuan Zhao, Yilai Liu +4
Sep 3, 2026cs.CV

The Shape of Time: Video-Token Contrast for Temporal Understanding in VideoLMs

Seeing frames in order does not mean representing time. Modern VideoLMs receive ordered video streams, yet their main supervision acts on generated text rather than video-token representations where event dynamics should first emerge. This mismatch allows models to learn temporal answers from shortcuts such as objects, scenes, and language priors, without requiring internal video representations to capture event progression. To address this, we propose VT-Contrast, a representation-level temporal counterfactual objective for VideoLMs. Its design asks where temporal supervision should act and what temporal differences it should expose. VT-Contrast supervises selected late-layer last-frame video tokens, where temporal information is expected to be integrated before language generation, and contrasts order-preserving views with same-video reordered counterfactuals graded by Kendall tau distance. It requires no architectural changes, is compatible with diverse VideoLM training tasks, and improves overall performance across temporal understanding benchmarks. Our code is available at https://github.com/ANDgate99/VT-Contrast.
Yumeng Shi, Quanyu Long, Yin Wu +1