TensorX
返回文献探索

Paper · arXiv 2601.05175

VideoAuto-R1: Video Auto Reasoning via Thinking Once, Answering Twice

Shuming Liu, Mingchen Zhuge, Changsheng Zhao, Jun Chen, Lemeng Wu, Zechun Liu, Chenchen Zhu, Zhipeng Cai, Chong Zhou, Haozhe Liu, Ernie Chang, Saksham Suri, Hongyu Xu, Qi Qian, Wei Wen, Balakrishnan Varadarajan, Zhuang Liu, Hu Xu, Florian Bordes, Raghuraman Krishnamoorthi, Bernard Ghanem, Vikas Chandra, Yunyang Xiong

38 upvotesJanuary 8, 2026arXiv 预印本
AI 摘要

VideoAuto-R1 framework employs a reason-when-necessary strategy for video understanding, using a Thinking Once, Answering Twice training paradigm with verifiable rewards and confidence-based reasoning activation during inference.

Chain-of-thought reasoningmultimodal large language modelsvideo understandingRL-trained video modelsVideoAuto-R1Thinking Once Answering Twiceverifiable rewardsconfidence scoreperception-oriented tasksreasoning-intensive tasks

Abstract

Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning has emerged as a powerful tool for multimodal large language models on video understanding tasks. However, its necessity and advantages over direct answering remain underexplored. In this paper, we first demonstrate that for RL-trained video models, direct answering often matches or even surpasses CoT performance, despite CoT producing step-by-step analyses at a higher computational cost. Motivated by this, we propose VideoAuto-R1, a video understanding framework that adopts a reason-when-necessary strategy. During training, our approach follows a Thinking Once, Answering Twice paradigm: the model first generates an initial answer, then performs reasoning, and finally outputs a reviewed answer. Both answers are supervised via verifiable rewards. During inference, the model uses the confidence score of the initial answer to determine whether to proceed with reasoning. Across video QA and grounding benchmarks, VideoAuto-R1 achieves state-of-the-art accuracy with significantly improved efficiency, reducing the average response length by ~3.3x, e.g., from 149 to just 44 tokens. Moreover, we observe a low rate of thinking-mode activation on perception-oriented tasks, but a higher rate on reasoning-intensive tasks. This suggests that explicit language-based reasoning is generally beneficial but not always necessary.

北京市昌平区探索星信息技术及软件开发工作室

京ICP备2026059466号