Videos are expensive to analyze frame by frame, yet many video understanding tasks depend on knowing where relevant moments occur. A system may need to find when an action changes, locate the segment described by a sentence, or choose a few frames for a vision-language model. Existing methods often solve these problems separately, using task-specific training data or specialized architectures. We study whether a pretrained video-text model can provide enough temporal structure to support several of these tasks at once. We present STITCH, a training-free method that divides a video into semantically meaningful temporal chunks. STITCH embeds short video windows with a frozen video-text backbone and detects changes in the resulting embedding sequence. These chunks are computed once per video and reused across tasks. We evaluate STITCH on generic event boundary detection, language-based moment retrieval, and frame selection for long-video VLM reasoning. Across all three settings, STITCH remains competitive with more specialized methods while requiring no task-specific training, with especially clear gains when only a small number of frames or tokens can be processed. These results suggest that reusable temporal abstraction is a promising direction for general video understanding, allowing dense video streams to be converted once into semantic units that can be localized, retrieved, sampled, or reasoned over by downstream systems.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: STITCH converts semantic change into a reusable video timeline. As described in Section 3 , STITCH first encodes short video windows with a frozen video-text backbone, semantic change points are then detected in embedding space, and the video is partitioned into adaptive chunks. The same chunked timeline can be interpreted directly as event boundaries, scored with a language query for retrieval, or used to select compact visual evidence for long-video reasoning.
Figure 2: GEBD : STITCH boundaries reveal interpretable event transitions. In the event detection setting of Section 5 , STITCH uses chunk boundaries from the shared temporal abstraction as event boundary predictions. The text labels are manually added descriptions of the visible events, not outputs of the model; they are included to clarify what the predicted cuts separate in the video.
Table 1: Cross-task summary of specialized baselines and STITCH. The table groups prior methods by their reported task scope, so the N/A blocks indicate tasks outside a method’s evaluated setting rather than missing results. STITCH is evaluated across all three task families using the same training-free temporal abstraction front end. For event detection and moment retrieval, we report the representative metrics shown in the column headers; for long-video VLM QA, Δ denotes the accuracy gain over uniform frame sampling. All values are percentages. VLM results use LLaVA-OV 7B [ 19 ] with eight input frames and the MMR-based STITCH selector. Full metrics, uniform baselines for the VLM deltas, and additional STITCH variants are reported in Section A . Unified localization frameworks are discussed in Section 2 rather than reported as single rows because their benchmark suites only partially overlap with ours. More importantly, they unify localization-style prediction tasks, whereas STITCH also includes retrieval and frame-budgeted VLM reasoning. Types: Sup. = supervised, Unsup. = unsupervised, ZS = zero-shot transfer, TF = training-free.
Figure 5: STITCH gains are largest when frame density is lowest. These diagnostics compare STITCH-based selection with uniform sampling for Qwen3-VL-8B [ 2 ] . Left : error by video duration, aggregated over VideoMME, MLVU, and LongVideoBench at an 8-frame budget. Center : MLVU error by frame budget. Right : MLVU error by normalized frame budget in frames/sec.
Table 2: Generic event boundary detection on Kinetics-GEBD (val) and TAPOS (val). F1 scores (%) at selected relative-distance thresholds and averaged over all ten (0.05–0.50). Sup. = supervised, Unsup. = unsupervised, ZS = zero-shot transfer (trained on a different dataset and applied without retraining), TF = training-free.
Method
Type
R@1 IoU=.3
R@1 IoU=.5
R@1 IoU=.7
mIoU
SCDM [ 42 ]
Sup.
54.80
36.75
19.86
–
2D-TAN [ 45 ]
Sup.
59.45
44.51
26.54
–
SimBase [ 3 ]
Sup.
63.98
49.35
30.48
47.07
TFVTG [ 46 ]
TF
49.34
27.02
13.39
34.10
STITCH-Max (Ours)
TF
52.25
32.85
17.87
37.40
STITCH-Mean (Ours)
TF
51.54
32.51
17.95
37.10
Appendix
Table 3: Language-based moment retrieval on ActivityNet Captions (val split, 17,505 queries). All values are percentages. R@1 IoU= τ denotes recall at rank 1 with IoU threshold τ . † GEM with p=3 ; ‡ coherence-weighted mean with τ=5 . Sup. = supervised, TF = training-free.
Table 4: Language-based moment retrieval on QVHighlights (val split). All values are percentages. † GEM with p=12 ; ‡ coherence-weighted mean with τ=5 . Sup. = supervised, TF = training-free.
Model
Method
Size
Fr.
MLVU
LongVideoBench
VideoMME
Base
+Method
Δ
Base
+Method
Δ
Base
+Method
Δ
Qwen3-VL-8B
greedy (ours)
8B
8
50.89
60.59
+9.70
52.43
54.67
+2.24
55.63
57.70
+2.07
MMR penalty (ours)
8B
8
50.89
62.43
+11.54
52.43
55.80
+3.37
55.63
58.59
+2.96
LLaVA-OV
Frame-Voyager †‡ [ 41 ]
7B
8
58.5
65.6
+7.1
—
—
—
53.3
57.5
+4.2
KFC † [ 7 ]
7B
8
58.5
66.2
+7.7
54.5
55.6
+1.1
53.3
55.4
+2.1
BOLT † [ 23 ]
7B
8
58.9
63.4
+4.5
54.2
55.6
+1.4
53.8
56.1
+2.3
Appendix
Table 5: Multiple-choice VLM accuracy with eight input frames (%). Base : uniform; +Method : with selection; Δ : gain. Splits: MLVU dev (M-Avg) [ 48 ] , LongVideoBench val [ 38 ] , VideoMME test [ 8 ] . VLMs evaluated: LLaVA-OV [ 19 ] and Qwen3-VL [ 2 ] . † As reported in the method’s original paper; other LLaVA-OV baselines re-evaluated in that setup. ‡ Training-based. Dashes: LongVideoBench missing for Frame-Voyager in that table.
Temporal video understanding studies how models track actions, events, and changes over time to answer questions, locate moments, and predict what happens next.
Understanding causal event relationships and achieving fine-grained temporal grounding in videos remain challenging for vision-language models (VLMs). We propose TEMPURA (Temporal Event Masked Prediction and Understanding for Reasoning in Action), a two-stage training framework that enhances the video temporal understanding of VLMs. Inspired by infilling techniques in language modeling, TEMPURA first performs masked event prediction, learning to reconstruct missing events and generate step-by-step causal explanations from dense event annotations. It then learns video segmentation and dense captioning, decomposing videos into non-overlapping events with detailed, timestamp-aligned descriptions. We train TEMPURA on VER, our large-scale dataset of 500K videos annotated with temporally aligned event descriptions and structured reasoning steps. Experiments on video temporal grounding and highlight detection benchmarks show that TEMPURA substantially improves strong base VLMs across model families and scales, confirming that combining event-level reasoning with fine-grained temporal segmentation is an effective recipe for video temporal understanding.
Jen-Hao Cheng, Yi-Hao Peng, Huapeng Zhou +11
University of Washington · Carnegie Mellon University · National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University +1
Recent advancements in Video Large Language Models (VideoLLMs) have enabled strong performance across diverse multimodal video tasks. To reduce the high computational cost of processing dense video frames, efficiency-oriented methods such as frame selection have been widely adopted. While effective at minimizing redundancy, these methods often cause notable performance drops on tasks requiring temporal reasoning. Unlike humans, who can infer event progression from sparse visual cues, VideoLLMs frequently misinterpret temporal relations when intermediate frames are omitted. To address this limitation, we explore visual prompting (VP) as a lightweight yet effective way to enhance temporal understanding in VideoLLMs. Our analysis reveals that simply annotating each frame with explicit ordinal information helps the model perceive temporal continuity. This visual cue also supports frame-level referencing and mitigates positional ambiguity within a sparsely sampled sequence. Building on these insights, we introduce ViKey, a training-free framework that combines VP with a lightweight Keyword-Frame Mapping (KFM) module. KFM leverages frame indices as dictionary-like keys to link textual cues to the most relevant frames, providing explicit temporal anchors during inference. Despite its simplicity, our approach substantially improves temporal reasoning and, on some datasets, preserves dense-frame baseline performance with as few as 20% of frames.
The growing interest in embodied agents increases the demand for spatiotemporal video understanding, yet existing benchmarks largely emphasize extractive reasoning, where answers can be explicitly presented within spatiotemporal events. It remains unclear whether multimodal large language models can instead perform abstractive spatiotemporal reasoning, which requires integrating observations over time, combining dispersed cues, and inferring implicit spatial and contextual structure. To address this gap, we formalize abstractive spatiotemporal reasoning from videos by introducing a structured evaluation taxonomy that systematically targets its core dimensions and constructs a controllable, scenario-driven synthetic egocentric video dataset tailored to evaluate abstractive spatiotemporal reasoning capabilities, spanning object-, room-, and floor-plan-level scenarios. Based on this framework, we present VAEX-BENCH, a benchmark comprising five abstractive reasoning tasks together with their extractive counterparts. Our extensive experiments compare the performance of state-of-the-art MLLMs under extractive and abstractive settings, exposing their limitations on abstractive tasks and providing a fine-grained analysis of the underlying bottlenecks. The dataset will be released soon.