Papers › VideoQA in the Era of LLMs: An Empirical Study
VideoQA in the Era of LLMs: An Empirical Study
Junbin Xiao, Nanxin Huang, Hangyu Qin, Dongyang Li, Yicong Li, Fengbin Zhu, Zhulin Tao, Jianxing Yu, Liang Lin, Tat-Seng Chua, Angela Yao
Video Large Language Models (Video-LLMs) are flourishing and has advanced many video-language tasks. As a golden testbed, Video Question Answering (VideoQA) plays pivotal role in Video-LLM developing. This work conducts a timely and comprehensive study of Video-LLMs' behavior in VideoQA, aiming to elucidate their success and failure modes, and provide insights towards more human-like video understanding and question answering. Our analyses demonstrate that Video-LLMs excel in VideoQA; they can correlate contextual cues and generate plausible responses to questions about varied video contents. However, models falter in handling video temporality, both in reasoning about temporal content ordering and grounding QA-relevant temporal moments. Moreover, the models behave unintuitively - they are unresponsive to adversarial video perturbations while being sensitive to simple variations of candidate answers and questions. Also, they do not necessarily generalize better. The findings demonstrate Video-LLMs' QA capability in standard condition yet highlight their severe deficiency in robustness and interpretability, suggesting the urgent need on rationales in Video-LLM developing.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
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
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
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