arXiv:2608.03160cs.MMcs.CV2026-08

提出新方法区分视频模型对事件顺序判断的两种错误,提升准确率至0.92以上。

Caved or Convinced: Temporal Sampling Gates Claim Deference in Video Large Language Models

论文配图:Caved or Convinced: Temporal Sampling Gates Claim Deference in Video Large Language Models
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 通过帧重排与采样偏移分离可用性与权重问题
  • 在九个模型中实现0.92~1.00的顺序判断准确率
  • 适合关注视频大模型可信度与推理机制的研究者

当被问及两个事件的先后顺序时,视频大语言模型可能以两种相反方式出错:盲目接受错误说法,或拒绝正确信息。现有研究仅关注前者,通过降低对用户的信任来缓解,但此法在文本和图像模型中会加剧后者。在视频任务中,这两种错误源于两个被混为一谈的因素:可用性(采样帧是否包含两事件)与权重(是否相信证据而非用户)。本文通过两个干预手段保持说法不变:帧保留重排使说法真假反转,采样偏移则固定预算下捕获或遗漏两事件。当事件未被采到时,九个被测模型对真与假说法接受率相同,导致Youden's $J=0$。可用性必要但不充分;五模型能读取顺序,但四者仍会盲从错误说法,说明其信任存在权重上限。因无法对未采样证据校准信任,本文提出反向测试:对采样帧正向与反向评分,再决定回答、重采样或弃权。该测试使可读序模型准确率达0.92~1.00,不可读序模型则选择弃权而非猜测。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

When asked which of two events came first, video large language models can fail in two opposite ways: cave to a false claim, or reject a true one. Prior video sycophancy work measures only the first and mitigates it by teaching the model to trust the user less, a fix known in text and image models to worsen the second. In video, both failures come from two causes the literature treats as one: availability, whether the sparse sampled frames contain the two events, and weighting, whether that evidence is trusted over the user. We separate them with two interventions that keep the claim fixed: a frame-preserving reorder that flips the claim's truth, and a sampling-offset shift that captures or misses both events at a fixed frame budget. When the events are missed, the two twins present identical frames, so each of the nine models we evaluate accepts a true and a false claim at the same rate, making Youden's $J=0$ by construction. Availability is necessary but not sufficient. Five of the nine read the order, yet four of those five still cave to the false claim, so their deference hits a weighting ceiling. Since trust cannot be calibrated over evidence that was never sampled, we propose a reversal test that cancels the model's order prior by scoring the sampled frames forward and reversed, then answers, resamples, or abstains without reading the claim. The test raises the order accuracy to 0.92-1.00 on the models that read the order and abstains rather than guesses on those that cannot.

视频理解大模型推理可信度评估采样机制

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。