MME-CoF-Pro: Evaluating Reasoning Coherence in Video Generative Models with Text and Visual Hints

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.20194v1
• Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2026 17:59:56 GMT
• Title: MME-CoF-Pro: Evaluating Reasoning Coherence in Video Generative Models with Text and Visual Hints
• Abstract summary: MME-CoF-Pro is a benchmark to assess reasoning coherence in video models.<n>MME-CoF-Pro contains 303 samples across 16 categories, ranging from visual logical to scientific reasoning.
• Score: 95.27042253462963
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Video generative models show emerging reasoning behaviors. It is essential to ensure that generated events remain causally consistent across frames for reliable deployment, a property we define as reasoning coherence. To bridge the gap in literature for missing reasoning coherence evaluation, we propose MME-CoF-Pro, a comprehensive video reasoning benchmark to assess reasoning coherence in video models. Specifically, MME-CoF-Pro contains 303 samples across 16 categories, ranging from visual logical to scientific reasoning. It introduces Reasoning Score as evaluation metric for assessing process-level necessary intermediate reasoning steps, and includes three evaluation settings, (a) no hint (b) text hint and (c) visual hint, enabling a controlled investigation into the underlying mechanisms of reasoning hint guidance. Evaluation results in 7 open and closed-source video models reveals insights including: (1) Video generative models exhibit weak reasoning coherence, decoupled from generation quality. (2) Text hints boost apparent correctness but often cause inconsistency and hallucinated reasoning (3) Visual hints benefit structured perceptual tasks but struggle with fine-grained perception. Website: https://video-reasoning-coherence.github.io/

Related papers

• OpenCoF: Learning to Reason Through Video Generation [67.0484140851674]
  Reasoning has become a core capability for large models, especially when reliable decisions require understanding logical consequences.<n>Recent video generation models offer a reasoning path distinct from previous Chain-of-Thought (CoT)<n>We introduce OpenCoF, a framework comprising a reasoning video dataset spanning 11 task families, and Wan-CoF, a fine-tuned video model for studying whether diverse temporal supervision improves CoF behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-09T17:58:29Z)
• How Far Are Video Models from True Multimodal Reasoning? [32.10821745418955]
  CLVG-Bench is an evaluation framework designed to probe video models' zero-shot reasoning capabilities.<n>It comprises more than 1,000 high-quality, manually annotated metadata across 6 categories and 47 subcategories.<n>We propose an Adaptive Video Evaluator (AVE) that aligns with human expert perception using minimal annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-21T08:04:02Z)
• Clue Matters: Leveraging Latent Visual Clues to Empower Video Reasoning [14.945921705882725]
  This work bridges the perception-to-generation gap in MLLM video understanding, providing an interpretable, faithful reasoning paradigm for VideoQA applications.<n>Inspired by hierarchical human visual cognition, we propose ClueNet, a clue-aware video reasoning framework with a two-stage supervised fine-tuning paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-16T09:15:12Z)
• VIPER: Process-aware Evaluation for Generative Video Reasoning [64.86465792516658]
  We introduce VIPER, a comprehensive benchmark spanning 16 tasks across temporal, structural, symbolic, spatial, physics, and planning reasoning.<n>Our experiments reveal that state-of-the-art video models achieve only about 20% POC@1.0 and exhibit a significant outcome-hacking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-31T16:31:59Z)
• Video-R2: Reinforcing Consistent and Grounded Reasoning in Multimodal Language Models [56.851611990473174]
  Reasoning over dynamic visual content remains a central challenge for large language models.<n>We propose a reinforcement learning approach that enhances both temporal precision and reasoning consistency.<n>The resulting model, Video R2, achieves consistently higher TAC, VAS, and accuracy across multiple benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-28T18:59:58Z)
• Are Video Models Ready as Zero-Shot Reasoners? An Empirical Study with the MME-CoF Benchmark [124.00111584020834]
  We conduct an empirical study to investigate whether video models are ready to serve as zero-shot reasoners.<n>We focus on the leading and popular Veo-3.<n>We evaluate its reasoning behavior across 12 dimensions, including spatial, geometric, physical, temporal, and embodied logic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-30T17:59:55Z)
• BLINK-Twice: You see, but do you observe? A Reasoning Benchmark on Visual Perception [67.89135437537179]
  We introduce BLINK-Twice, a vision-centric reasoning benchmark grounded in challenging perceptual tasks.<n>Instead of relying on external knowledge, our tasks require models to reason from visual content alone.<n>Compared to prior perception benchmarks, it moves beyond shallow perception and requires fine-grained observation and analytical reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-10T13:14:13Z)
• CoRGI: Verified Chain-of-Thought Reasoning with Post-hoc Visual Grounding [1.6257248483123767]
  We present textbfCoRGI(textbfChain textbfof textbfReasoning with textbfGrounded textbfInsights), a framework that enhances reasoning reliability through post-hoc verification of chain-of-thought outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T07:17:12Z)
• REFINER: Reasoning Feedback on Intermediate Representations [47.36251998678097]
  We introduce REFINER, a framework for finetuning language models to generate intermediate inferences. REFINER works by interacting with a critic model that provides automated feedback on the reasoning. Empirical evaluations show significant improvements over baseline LMs of comparable scale.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-04T15:57:28Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.