Multi-hop Knowledge Graph Question Answering (KGQA) requires coherent reasoning across relational paths, yet existing methods often treat each reasoning step independently and fail to effectively leverage experience from prior explorations, leading to fragmented reasoning and redundant exploration. To address these challenges, we propose Trajectoryaware Reasoning with Adaptive Context and Exploration priors (TRACE), an experiential framework that unifies LLM-driven contextual reasoning with exploration prior integration to enhance the coherence and robustness of multihop KGQA. Specifically, TRACE dynamically translates evolving reasoning paths into natural language narratives to maintain semantic continuity, while abstracting prior exploration trajectories into reusable experiential priors that capture recurring exploration patterns. A dualfeedback re-ranking mechanism further integrates contextual narratives with exploration priors to guide relation selection during reasoning. Extensive experiments on multiple KGQA benchmarks demonstrate that TRACE consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines.

Current video benchmarks for multimodal large language models (MLLMs) focus on event recognition, temporal ordering, and long-context recall, but overlook a harder capability required for expert procedural judgment: tracking how ongoing interactions update the procedural state and thereby determine the correctness of later actions. We introduce SiMing-Bench, the first benchmark for evaluating this capability from full-length clinical skill videos. It targets rubric-grounded process-level judgment of whether interaction-driven state updates preserve procedural correctness across an entire workflow. SiMing-Bench is instantiated with SiMing-Score, a physician-annotated dataset of real clinical skill examination videos spanning cardiopulmonary resuscitation, automated external defibrillator operation, and bag-mask ventilation, each paired with a standardized step-wise rubric and dual-expert labels. Across diverse open- and closed-source MLLMs, we observe consistently weak agreement with physician judgments. Moreover, weak performance on rubric-defined intermediate steps persists even when overall procedure-level correlation appears acceptable, suggesting that coarse global assessment substantially overestimates current models’ procedural judgment ability. Additional analyses with binary step judgment and step-aligned clips indicate that the bottleneck is not merely fine-grained scoring or temporal localization, but modeling how continuous interactions update procedural state over time.