Evaluates multimodal large language models' ability to comprehend hour-long videos across nine distinct tasks, including classification, recognition, localization, captioning, emotion recognition, and needle-in-a-haystack retrieval. It specifically probes temporal reasoning, detail extraction, and long-context retention over extended video durations. Use when the user wants to benchmark on ALLVB, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill allvb-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Allvb Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-allvb-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: allvb-eval
description: Evaluates multimodal large language models' ability to comprehend hour-long videos across nine distinct tasks, including classification, recognition, localization, captioning, emotion recognition, and needle-in-a-haystack retrieval. It specifically probes temporal reasoning, detail extraction, and long-context retention over extended video durations. Use when the user wants to benchmark on ALLVB, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2503.07298
bibtex_key: tan2025allvb
confidence: high
---
# allvb-eval
> ALLVB: All-in-One Long Video Understanding Benchmark — Tan et al. (2025) (arXiv:2503.07298, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates multimodal large language models' ability to comprehend hour-long videos across nine distinct tasks, including classification, recognition, localization, captioning, emotion recognition, and needle-in-a-haystack retrieval. It specifically probes temporal reasoning, detail extraction, and long-context retention over extended video durations.
## Datasets
- **ALLVB** — total 1376; splits: test (1376)
## Metrics
- `accuracy` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Percentage of correctly answered multiple-choice questions. Calculated as (number of correct predictions / total number of questions) * 100.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Video frames or clips corresponding to the entire movie, a specific sub-plot, or a Needle-in-a-Haystack segment, accompanied by subtitles and a multiple-choice question with 5 options.
**Output**: A single uppercase letter (A, B, C, D, or E) indicating the selected option.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_accuracy(predictions, gold_labels):
correct = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, gold_labels) if p == g)
return (correct / len(gold_labels)) * 100
```
## Common pitfalls
- Questions are generated from movie scripts using GPT-4o, so script-video mismatches (e.g., visual details like object colors or actions) may cause answer discrepancies if models rely solely on visual input without script context.
- The Needle-in-a-Haystack task divides videos into 10 segments and samples 11 frames per segment, requiring frame-level retrieval rather than just temporal context understanding, which can confuse models trained only on video-level inputs.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> All Q&As are presented as multiple-choice questions, with each question offering 5 options, one correct answer, and 4 distractors. This format allows for easy calculation of accuracy during testing and eliminates the subjective judgment issues associated with open-ended answers.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{tan2025allvb,
title={ALLVB: All-in-One Long Video Understanding Benchmark},
author={Tan et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2503.07298}
}
```
- arXiv: 2503.07298
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!