Yuxiang Duan
Publications
AgenticVAU: Multi-Agent Explore-Verify Reasoning for Video Anomaly Understanding
Video anomaly understanding (VAU) focuses on comprehensively interpreting abnormal events in videos, requiring models to identify anomalous occurrences, discover their supporting evidence, and explain the underlying causes beyond simple anomaly detection. Existing VAU methods often rely on specialized training or limited observations, restricting generalization or evidence coverage. Although single-agent alternatives support adaptive video observation, they still integrate exploration, observation, and decision-making within a unified reasoning process, offering limited role specialization and structured evidence coordination. To address these limitations, we present AgenticVAU, a training-free multi-agent framework that casts VAU as an explore--verify process, where the system first discovers potential anomalies and then verifies them through targeted observations. To achieve this, four specialized agents are introduced to handle visual-rule construction, search planning, video observation, and final decision, respectively. These agents communicate through an anchor registry, a shared evidence memory that binds each observation. Guided by this agent framework, AgenticVAU interleaves broad temporal exploration, dense local verification, and cross-interval comparison until sufficient evidence is collected. We conduct extensive experiments on the ECVA, UCF-Crime, and MSAD subsets of VAU-Bench, the results show that AgenticVAU outperforms zero-shot inference and reinforcement learning-based baselines, demonstrating the value of multi-agent collaboration for video anomaly understanding.
M3MAD-Bench: Are Multi-Agent Debates Really Effective Across Domains and Modalities?
As an agent-level reasoning and coordination paradigm, Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) orchestrates multiple agents through structured debate to improve answer quality and support complex reasoning. However, existing research on MAD suffers from two fundamental limitations: evaluations are conducted under fragmented and inconsistent settings, hindering fair comparison, and are largely restricted to single-modality scenarios that rely on textual inputs only. To address these gaps, we introduce M3MAD-Bench, a unified and extensible benchmark for evaluating MAD methods across Multi-domain tasks, Multi-modal inputs, and Multi-dimensional metrics. M3MAD-Bench establishes standardized protocols over five core task domains: Knowledge, Mathematics, Medicine, Natural Sciences, and Complex Reasoning, and systematically covers both pure text and vision-language datasets, enabling controlled cross-modality comparison. We evaluate MAD methods on nine base models spanning different architectures, scales, and modality capabilities. Beyond accuracy, M3MAD-Bench incorporates efficiency-oriented metrics such as token consumption and inference time, providing a holistic view of performance--cost trade-offs. Extensive experiments yield systematic insights into the effectiveness, robustness, and efficiency of MAD across text-only and multimodal scenarios. We believe M3MAD-Bench offers a reliable foundation for future research on standardized MAD evaluation. The code is available at http://github.com/liaolea/M3MAD-Bench.