While modern autonomous driving systems excel at perception tasks such as object detection and trajectory prediction, they lack the high-level causal reasoning required to interpret traffic accidents. In particular, determining responsibility, such as identifying who is at fault and which traffic rule was violated, remains largely unexplored in current benchmarks. To this end, we introduce CAViAR (Causal Accident Video and Incident Analysis Repository), a human-annotated dashcam benchmark comprising 2,249 real-world accident videos collected from CarCrashDataset (CCD) and Nexar. Each video is annotated with structured labels spanning environmental conditions, accident type, causal explanation, apparent At-Fault Agent, affected agent, and apparent rule-violation category. We benchmark state-of-the-art vision-language models (VLMs), including Cosmos-Reason2, Qwen3-VL, and InternVL3. Once class imbalance is accounted for with majority/random baselines and balanced metrics, perceptual competence is uneven--lighting is nearly solved, whereas weather and road-condition accuracy fall at or below the majority-class baseline---and all models degrade sharply on accident type and responsibility reasoning. Overall, CAViAR exposes a practical Perception--Reasoning Gap: current VLMs may recognize salient context, but do not reliably map visible agent actions to annotated rule-relevant responsibility categories in safety-critical driving scenarios. Code, annotation schema, prompts, and evaluation scripts are available at: https://github.com/nec-labs-ma/CAViAR
Figures & tables
Dataset
View
#Clips
VQA
Causal
Dense Cap.
At-Fault
Rule Viol.
Real/Synth.
CCD [ 3 ]
Dashcam
1,500
N
N
N
N
N
Real
Nexar [ 11 ]
Dashcam
5M+
N
N
N
N
N
Real
ROL [ 8 ]
Dashcam
1,000
N
N
N
N
N
Real
DeepAccident [ 13 ]
Dashcam
–
N
N
N
N
N
Synthetic
CTA [ 17 ]
Dashcam
1,935
Y
N
N
N
N
Real
CTAD [ 10 ]
Surveillance
1,100
N
N
N
N
N
Synthetic
Table 1: Comparison of accident video datasets. CAViAR uniquely provides structured supervision for fault attribution and traffic rule violation identification .
Figure 1: Example CAViAR video with its nine QA prompts grouped into eight task families, spanning dense captioning, environmental conditions, accident type, and video-grounded responsibility annotations (apparent at-fault agent, affected agent, and apparent rule-violation category).
ID
Task family
Question template / label space
Type
Train
Test
Missing
Metric
T1a/T1b
Dense Captioning
Detailed event description and brief accident summary.
Open
2,991
1,475
32
BERTScore-F1
T2
Weather
What is the weather condition? {sunny, rainy, cloudy, snowy}.
MCQ
1,500
749
0
Acc.
T3
Lighting
Is the video taken during day or night? {day, night}.
MCQ
1,500
749
0
Acc.
T4
Road Condition
What is the road condition? {dry, wet, snowy}.
MCQ
1,500
749
0
Acc.
T5
Accident Type
What type of accident occurred? {rear-end, T-bone, side-by-side, head-on, none}.
MCQ
1,500
749
0
Acc.
T6
Apparent At-Fault Agent
Which visible road user appears to have initiated the unsafe interaction?
Open
1,483
724
42
Judge
Table 2: Canonical CAViAR task taxonomy and statistics. CAViAR contains nine QA prompts grouped into eight task families.
MCQ Acc.
BERTScore-F1
Judge
Model
Base
FT
Δ
Base
FT
Δ
Base
FT
Δ
Cosmos2-2B
66.66
74.80
+8.14
29.48
47.73
+18.25
1.396
1.814
+0.418
Cosmos2-8B
65.29
65.79
+0.50
27.04
27.66
+0.62
1.127
1.382
+0.255
Qwen3-2B
55.67
67.16
+11.49
20.07
45.36
+25.29
1.280
1.763
+0.483
Qwen3-8B
61.42
62.32
+0.90
12.85
19.71
+6.86
1.150
1.397
+0.247
InternVL3-2B
61.95
62.68
+0.73
29.59
33.53
+3.94
1.203
1.318
+0.115
Table 3: Main results on Nexar at 16 FPS. We report MCQ accuracy (%), BERTScore-F1 (%), and LLM-as-Judge (0–5) for Base vs. fine-tuned (FT) models.
Figure 2: Row-normalized accident-type confusion matrices, aggregated over all six models (base vs. fine-tuned) at 16 FPS ( N=4,494 predictions each). Both regimes collapse onto Rear-End and rarely recover Side-by-Side or Head-on (quantitative details in text).
Table 6
Code
Violation family
Train%
Test%
Judge ↑
FD
Unsafe following distance / rear-end
22.1
32.8
0.64
RW
Failure to yield / right-of-way
27.4
30.6
0.93
LC
Improper lane change / merging
12.8
17.2
0.33
TU
Improper turn / U-turn / reversing
6.9
5.9
0.59
SG
Signal / sign violation
5.5
5.5
0.60
ST
Sudden stop / improper stopping
1.3
2.3
0.08
Table 6: Traffic-rule violation families on CAViAR (train/test % of violation answers) and per-family difficulty (mean LLM-as-Judge score, 0 – 5 , averaged over all evaluated models on the Nexar test split). Mapping uses a deterministic ordered lexicon over the ontology described in Sec. 4.3 ; “–” denotes families with no test support. The space spans eleven families rather than a single dominant rule.
Model
Setting
Weather
Acc. Type
Road
MCQ Overall
BERT-F1
Qwen3-VL-2B
FT
84.67
12.67
77.67
64.92
39.60
Qwen3-VL-8B
FT
77.33
34.33
82.67
67.92
33.66
Cosmos2-2B
Base
77.67
31.33
62.00
62.17
34.46
Cosmos2-8B
Base
74.00
35.33
71.67
63.75
31.12
Table 7: CCD holdout ablation (same-source split: 1,200 train / 300 test, all CCD). Per-task MCQ accuracy (%) and overall BERTScore-F1 (%) for open-ended tasks. Reasoning scores remain low even without the CCD → Nexar domain shift.
Task / Distribution
TVD ↑
JSD (bits) ↑
Key shift
Weather
0.104
0.020
Snowy vanishes (2.3% → 0%)
Lighting
0.268
0.074
Night triples (10.6% → 37.4%)
Road Condition
0.192
0.072
Snowy vanishes (12.1% → 0.1%)
Accident Type
0.362
0.161
Majority flips (T-Bone → None)
Rule-Viol. Family
0.182
0.063
Control/speed vanish; FD rises
Table 8: Train/test label shift between CCD (train) and Nexar (test). TVD = Total Variation Distance (0 = identical, 1 = disjoint); JSD = Jensen–Shannon Divergence (bits). Accident Type shows the largest shift; Weather is relatively stable.