TPRU: Advancing Temporal and Procedural Understanding in Large Multimodal Models
Zhenkun Gao, Xuhong Wang, Xin Tan, Yuan Xie

TL;DR
This paper introduces TPRU, a large-scale dataset and training methodology that significantly improves temporal and procedural understanding in small multimodal models, enabling better real-world embodied AI applications.
Contribution
The paper presents TPRU, a novel dataset with tasks designed for temporal reasoning, and a reinforcement learning fine-tuning approach that enhances small multimodal models' understanding capabilities.
Findings
TPRU-7B accuracy increased from 50.33% to 75.70%.
State-of-the-art performance on TPRU-Test.
Significant improvements on existing benchmarks.
Abstract
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs), particularly smaller, deployable variants, exhibit a critical deficiency in understanding temporal and procedural visual data, a bottleneck hindering their application in real-world embodied AI. This gap is largely caused by a systemic failure in training paradigms, which lack large-scale, procedurally coherent data. To address this problem, we introduce TPRU, a large-scale dataset sourced from diverse embodied scenarios such as robotic manipulation and GUI navigation. TPRU is systematically designed to cultivate temporal reasoning through three complementary tasks: Temporal Reordering, Next-Frame Prediction, and Previous-Frame Review. A key feature is the inclusion of challenging negative samples, compelling models to transition from passive observation to active, cross-modal validation. We leverage TPRU with a reinforcement learning (RL)…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2026 Poster
- The dataset is moderately large (~25k examples, ~126k images), which is useful for training. - The dataset covers a variety of embodiments (e.g. GUI, robotic manipulation, navigation...), which is useful for multiple applications. - The test set is manually curated/validated and held-out from training, which means it's likely to be high quality and a good measure of generalization. - The TPRU-trained models and the data generation pipeline have comprehensive evaluations and ablation studies, w
- It's unclear to me why only GRPO was used on the data as a learning algorithm/paradigm, but not simpler training regimes like simple SFT, which is usually the first thing people try. - The dataset poses all examples as multiple-choice-questions (MCQs) where one of the answer is "reject all answers", it's unclear why this format was chosen instead of free generation of answers. - It's unclear to me why the 7B model ends up performing better on TPRU-test than the 32B model. - Section 3 is ca
Valuable dataset contribution. The creation of a large-scale dataset focused on temporal and procedural reasoning is a meaningful engineering effort. If released publicly, it could be beneficial for the community and future research. Clear visual presentation. Figures are well-designed and make the method and dataset structure easy to understand. Comprehensive related work and supplementary content. The paper provides detailed literature review and supplemental materials that help contextualiz
Motivation needs stronger justification. The core motivation—that existing datasets treat images as unordered—is not fully convincing. For example, LLaVA-Next-Interleave and other multimodal corpora already include temporal and sequential interactions (e.g., embodied tasks, spatial sequences). The paper should more clearly articulate what specific gaps remain and how TPRU uniquely addresses them. Dataset source selection lacks coherence. The four data domains—robotic manipulation, LEGO assembly
1. The paper is well written and easy to follow. 2. By pairing a training dataset explicitly structured for temporal reasoning with a matched held-out test set, this paper tries to address a known gap where multi-image sequences are often treated as unordered sets. The negative-sample design explicitly trains rejection of inconsistent options, pushing models toward cross-modal verification rather than text-prior heuristics. 3. The ablations show all three tasks are synergistic, negative samples
1. Quality control and description generation rely on Qwen2.5-VL-72B. This can induce latent bias or style leakage into both data and targets. While pragmatic, the paper does not quantify inter-annotator agreement on machine-generated descriptions nor analyze failure modes from automated filtering. A small human-validated subset analysis for precision/recall of filter acceptance and error taxonomy would strengthen robustness claims. 2. The three tasks are framed around 3–4-frame sequences with M
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMultimodal Machine Learning Applications · Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis · Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
