Reading Between the Frames: Interpreting Implicit and Non-literal Meaning in Social Media Videos

Any new medium, once it emerges, is used for more than the transmission of overt content alone. The information it carries typically operates on two levels: one is the content directly presented, while the other is the subtext beneath it-the implicit ideas and intentions the creator seeks to convey through the medium. Likewise, since video technologies became widely adopted, video has served not only as a powerful tool for recording and communicating visual information, but also as a vehicle for emotions, attitudes, and social meanings that are often difficult to articulate explicitly. Thus, the true meaning of many videos does not reside solely in what is shown on screen; it is often embedded in context, style of expression, and the viewer's social experience. Some forms of such video subtext are humorous, while others carry irony, mockery, or criticism. These implicit meanings can also be interpreted very differently across cultural backgrounds and social groups. However, most existing video understanding models still focus primarily on literal visual comprehension, such as recognizing objects, actions, or temporal relations, and lack a systematic ability to understand the metaphorical, ironic, and social meanings embedded in videos. To bridge this gap, we introduce ViMU, the first benchmark designed to systematically evaluate the subtext understanding capabilities of frontier models in videos. ViMU assesses whether video understanding models can go beyond literal perception to infer implicit meaning while grounding their interpretations in multimodal evidence and answering both open-ended and multiple-choice questions. Importantly, all questions are designed to be hint-free, ensuring that no key evidence is disclosed to models before answering.

Training Multimodal Large Language Models for audio-visual social understanding is a crucial step toward embodied social intelligence. Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning has become the dominant approach, with HumanOmniV2 and its IntentBench benchmark as a prominent reference point. In this context, we report three findings. First, IntentBench is highly noisy: $\sim$7% of questions are broken and $\sim$23% are trivially answerable without the video input. We remove the affected questions and release Intentbench-Prime. Second, current reasoning approaches are expensive and surprisingly ineffective. A simple Vanilla SFT baseline matches or outperforms existing reasoning methods across three benchmarks at a fraction of the cost, establishing it as an essential baseline for evaluating novel fine-tuning techniques. Third, our analysis reveals that substantial priors can be learned solely from the text modality and that using a textual caption instead of the video yields performance on par with Vanilla SFT. These surprising findings reveal the limitations of current MLLMs when it comes to social understanding. IntentBench-Prime, Vanilla SFT model, and code are publicly available.

Large vision-language models (LVLMs) have recently shown immense potential in automated content moderation, sparking growing interest in developing harmful-video benchmarks. However, we identify two primary limitations in existing works: 1) The multi-layered characteristics of harmful videos are overlooked. Existing benchmarks predominantly formulate evaluation as a binary classification task, failing to capture implicit or deep contextual harms. 2) Explanatory rationales are completely absent. Current frameworks measure exclusively whether a model flags a video correctly rather than explaining why, turning evaluation into a black box where models can succeed through superficial shortcuts. To address these problems, we present HarmVideoBench, a multi-layered diagnostic benchmark comprising 1,379 videos paired with 4,137 multiple-choice questions. HarmVideoBench benchmarks three hierarchical dimensions: Observable Evidence, Clip-Internal Meaning, and Beyond-Clip Reasoning, aiming to evaluate models' deep understanding beyond surface cues with carefully balanced and curated samples. We evaluate 19 leading models on HarmVideoBench to assess their multidimensional understanding of harmful videos. Moreover, we introduce BCR, a benchmark-aligned method that predicts reasoning boundaries and dynamically retrieves context only when needed. Experimental results show that BCR substantially improves the base model's performance in harmful video understanding, raising the macro average from 61.7 percent to a state-of-the-art 84.4 percent.