Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

HFEPX · Eval paper review

Beyond Watching and Searching: Benchmarking Agents for Video-centered Deep Research Reports

Jiahao Meng, Qize Yang, Yuxuan Wang, Yunfei Chu +3 more

Published

Oct 22, 2026

Citations

0

Trust level

Moderate

Usefulness score

65/100 (Medium)

Extraction confidence

65% (Moderate)

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Rater population

Not reported

Signals refreshed

Oct 22, 2026

Should you rely on this paper?

This paper has useful evaluation signal, but protocol completeness is partial; pair it with related papers before deciding implementation strategy.

Use this for comparison and orientation, not as your only source.

Best use

Secondary protocol comparison source

Use if you need

A concrete protocol example with enough signal to inform rater workflow design.

What to verify

Validate the exact study setup in the full paper before operational use.

Main weakness

The abstract does not clearly describe the evaluation setup.

Human feedback signal
Detected
From extracted signals
Evaluation signal
Weak or implicit
Validate from full paper
Usefulness for eval research
65/100
Moderate-confidence candidate

Useful as a secondary reference; validate protocol details against neighboring papers.

Abstract

Deep research agents synthesize open-web evidence into long reports, but current benchmarks do not evaluate research centered on a source video. We introduce Video-Centered Deep Research Report Generation. Given a video and user request, an agent identifies research questions, retrieves external multimodal evidence, and produces an interactive report linked to relevant video moments. This task has direct practical value because it helps users locate relevant moments, verify claims, reproduce demonstrated procedures, and make informed decisions from video content. We present a skill-based workflow and OmniDR-Bench for this task. For evaluation, we propose Omni Atomic Rubric Trees (Omni-ARTs). Each tree contains three dimensions, 23 shared directions, and task-specific atomic binary criteria. The directions test audiovisual grounding, multimodal evidence use, and interactive presentation. Audited Rubric Construction (ARC) builds these trees through independent evidence collection, automated checks, behavioral calibration, and iterative human review. OmniDR-Bench contains 50 Chinese and English tasks across 19 realworld subcategories. It includes 6,414 criteria. Across 18 agent configurations, the best system scores 63.3 out of 100. Current agents still need broader content coverage, stronger causal and logical analysis across modalities, and more accurate citation support. We further analyze models, harnesses, skill configurations, video categories, and research trajectories. The code and data are released at https://github.com/marinero4972/OmniDR-Bench.

What we could verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

strong

Rubric Rating

Directly usable for protocol triage.

"Deep research agents synthesize open-web evidence into long reports, but current benchmarks do not evaluate research centered on a source video."

Evaluation Modes

missing

None explicit

Validate eval design from full paper text.

"Deep research agents synthesize open-web evidence into long reports, but current benchmarks do not evaluate research centered on a source video."

Quality Controls

strong

Calibration

Calibration/adjudication style controls detected.

"Audited Rubric Construction (ARC) builds these trees through independent evidence collection, automated checks, behavioral calibration, and iterative human review."

Benchmarks / Datasets

strong

Omnidr Bench

Useful for quick benchmark comparison.

"We present a skill-based workflow and OmniDR-Bench for this task."

Reported Metrics

missing

Not extracted

No metric anchors detected.

"Deep research agents synthesize open-web evidence into long reports, but current benchmarks do not evaluate research centered on a source video."

Benchmarks and datasets

Omnidr-Bench

Reported metrics

No metric terms were extracted from the available abstract.

Human feedback details
Uses human feedback
Yes
Feedback types
Rubric Rating
Rater population
Not reported
Unit of annotation
Multi Dim Rubric
Expertise required
Coding
Evaluation details
Evaluation modes
None
Agentic eval
None
Quality controls
Calibration
Evidence quality
Moderate
Use this page as
Secondary protocol comparison source

Research brief

Metadata summary

Deep research agents synthesize open-web evidence into long reports, but current benchmarks do not evaluate research centered on a source video.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key takeaways

  • Deep research agents synthesize open-web evidence into long reports, but current benchmarks do not evaluate research centered on a source video.
  • We introduce Video-Centered Deep Research Report Generation.
  • Given a video and user request, an agent identifies research questions, retrieves external multimodal evidence, and produces an interactive report linked to relevant video moments.

Researcher actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Check the full text for explicit evaluation design choices (raters, protocol, and metrics).
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Contribution summary

  • We introduce Video-Centered Deep Research Report Generation.
  • We present a skill-based workflow and OmniDR-Bench for this task.
  • For evaluation, we propose Omni Atomic Rubric Trees (Omni-ARTs).

Why it matters for eval

  • Deep research agents synthesize open-web evidence into long reports, but current benchmarks do not evaluate research centered on a source video.
  • For evaluation, we propose Omni Atomic Rubric Trees (Omni-ARTs).

Researcher checklist

  • Human feedback protocol is explicit

    Detected: Rubric Rating

  • Evaluation mode is explicit

    No clear evaluation mode extracted.

  • Quality control reporting appears

    Detected: Calibration

  • Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    Detected: Omnidr-Bench

  • Metric reporting is present

    No metric terms extracted.