Papers › Glance and Focus: Memory Prompting for Multi-Event Video Question Answering
Glance and Focus: Memory Prompting for Multi-Event Video Question Answering
Ziyi Bai, Ruiping Wang, Xilin Chen
Video Question Answering (VideoQA) has emerged as a vital tool to evaluate agents' ability to understand human daily behaviors. Despite the recent success of large vision language models in many multi-modal tasks, complex situation reasoning over videos involving multiple human-object interaction events still remains challenging. In contrast, humans can easily tackle it by using a series of episode memories as anchors to quickly locate question-related key moments for reasoning. To mimic this effective reasoning strategy, we propose the Glance-Focus model. One simple way is to apply an action detection model to predict a set of actions as key memories. However, these actions within a closed set vocabulary are hard to generalize to various video domains. Instead of that, we train an Encoder-Decoder to generate a set of dynamic event memories at the glancing stage. Apart from using supervised bipartite matching to obtain the event memories, we further design an unsupervised memory generation method to get rid of dependence on event annotations. Next, at the focusing stage, these event memories act as a bridge to establish the correlation between the questions with high-level event concepts and low-level lengthy video content. Given the question, the model first focuses on the generated key event memory, then focuses on the most relevant moment for reasoning through our designed multi-level cross-attention mechanism. We conduct extensive experiments on four Multi-Event VideoQA benchmarks including STAR, EgoTaskQA, AGQA, and NExT-QA. Our proposed model achieves state-of-the-art results, surpassing current large models in various challenging reasoning tasks. The code and models are available at https://github.com/ByZ0e/Glance-Focus.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2401.01529")
Code
Syntology Ran 9 of 18 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 9 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · violated contract; 8 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 18 samples from 1 repository, 9 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
18 samples harvested; 9 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 9 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 18 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from byz0e/glance-focus. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
d725dcf4cf20da7f · report
440bd21060030be0 · report
c61a34a3c9e0df91 · report
6941a4a46f03fa07 · report
cef10190a6f8f7e9 · report
b7639c2e8b83837b · report
93d1fd5afccb1ea1 · report
c31fe80a1b2ba813 · report
bab1acae729c21cf · report
e66b5e8b24dfea32 · report
1eee3af921bc5d88 · report
bace1acf5a748097 · report
7de9d66696a307eb · report
6381e6df15302a0e · report
bffb542b7e13c786 · report
0b0c5cf51bc1e61f · report
7114f025044af9b4 · report
e4ae5582a2533cdb · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Question Answering | EgoTaskQA | GF(sup) | Direct | 44.27 | #2 of 4 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Question Answering | EgoTaskQA | GF(uns) | Direct | 43.06 | #3 of 4 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Video Question Answering | AGQA 2.0 balanced | GF (sup) - Faster RCNN | Average Accuracy | 55.08 | #1 of 8 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Video Question Answering | AGQA 2.0 balanced | GF (uns) - S3D | Average Accuracy | 53.33 | #3 of 8 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Video Question Answering | AGQA 2.0 balanced | AIO - ViT | Average Accuracy | 48.59 | #7 of 8 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Video Question Answering | NExT-QA | GF | Accuracy | 58.83 | #38 of 47 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Video Question Answering | STAR Benchmark | GF(sup) | Average Accuracy | 53.94 | #5 of 17 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Video Question Answering | STAR Benchmark | GF(uns) | Average Accuracy | 53.86 | #6 of 17 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections