Lingjun Chen

Kuangzhi Ge, Lingjun Chen, Kevin Zhang et al.

Recently, significant advances have been made in Video Large Language Models (Video LLMs) in both academia and industry. However, methods to evaluate and benchmark the performance of different Video LLMs, especially their fine-grained, temporal visual capabilities, remain very limited. On one hand, current benchmarks use relatively simple videos (e.g., subtitled movie clips) where the model can understand the entire video by processing just a few frames. On the other hand, their datasets lack diversity in task format, comprising only QA or multi-choice QA, which overlooks the models' capacity for generating in-depth and precise texts. Sports videos, which feature intricate visual information, sequential events, and emotionally charged commentary, present a critical challenge for Video LLMs, making sports commentary an ideal benchmarking task. Inspired by these challenges, we propose a novel task: sports video commentary generation, developed $\textbf{SCBench}$ for Video LLMs. To construct such a benchmark, we introduce (1) $\textbf{SCORES}$, a six-dimensional metric specifically designed for our task, upon which we propose a GPT-based evaluation method, and (2) $\textbf{CommentarySet}$, a dataset consisting of 5,775 annotated video clips and ground-truth labels tailored to our metric. Based on SCBench, we conduct comprehensive evaluations on multiple Video LLMs (e.g. VILA, Video-LLaVA, etc.) and chain-of-thought baseline methods. Our results found that InternVL-Chat-2 achieves the best performance with 5.44, surpassing the second-best by 1.04. Our work provides a fresh perspective for future research, aiming to enhance models' overall capabilities in complex visual understanding tasks. Our dataset will be released soon.

Zijian Wu, Xiangyan Liu, Xinyuan Zhang et al.

MCP standardizes how LLMs interact with external systems, forming the foundation for general agents. However, existing MCP benchmarks remain narrow in scope: they focus on read-heavy tasks or tasks with limited interaction depth, and fail to capture the complexity and realism of real-world workflows. To address this gap, we propose MCPMark, a benchmark designed to evaluate MCP use in a more realistic and comprehensive manner. It consists of $127$ high-quality tasks collaboratively created by domain experts and AI agents. Each task begins with a curated initial state and includes a programmatic script for automatic verification. These tasks demand richer and more diverse interactions with the environment, involving a broad range of create, read, update, and delete (CRUD) operations. We conduct a comprehensive evaluation of cutting-edge LLMs using a minimal agent framework that operates in a tool-calling loop. Empirical results show that the best-performing model, gpt-5-medium, reaches only $52.56$\% pass@1 and $33.86$\% pass^4, while other widely regarded strong models, including claude-sonnet-4 and o3, fall below $30$\% pass@1 and $15$\% pass^4. On average, LLMs require $16.2$ execution turns and $17.4$ tool calls per task, significantly surpassing those in previous MCP benchmarks and highlighting the stress-testing nature of MCPMark.