HappyWorld-Bench
HappyWorld-Bench finds reliability gaps in video, spatial, and embodied world models under interaction.
HappyWorld-Bench evaluates whether generated worlds stay reliable under exploration, interaction, and modification, using six hierarchical capabilities across video, spatial, and embodied tracks. It includes 1,138 video prompts, 300 spatial scenes, and 254 embodied test cases, with HappyWorld-Arena producing human A/B Elo ratings alongside automated behavioral metrics. Evaluations of 14 video, 9 spatial, and 8 embodied systems show consistency failures: spatial models top out at 70.14% placement accuracy and 73.33% edit execution, and embodied models struggle to preserve state across multi-step actions.
- Six capabilities span construction through unified world modeling.
- Tracks cover 1,138 video prompts, 300 spatial scenes, and 254 embodied cases.
- Arena Elo ratings complement automated behavioral-correctness metrics.
- 14 video, 9 spatial, and 8 embodied systems were evaluated.
- Spatial models reach at best 70.14% placement and 73.33% edit accuracy.
Full article217 words · extracted from huggingface.co · click to collapse
Evaluating world models requires assessing both the quality of the worlds they generate and their consistency and responsiveness under exploration, interaction, and modification. We introduce HappyWorld-Bench, a comprehensive benchmark that evaluates whether generated worlds remain reliable as agents interact with them. Our design is built on a hierarchical capability framework of six world capabilities (W1-W6), from generative construction to unified world modeling, instantiated across three independent evaluation tracks: video world models, spatial world models, and embodied world models. HappyWorld-Bench comprises 1,138 video prompts, 300 spatial scenes, and 254 embodied test cases. Across all three tracks, we build and operate HappyWorld-Arena to organize human A/B comparisons and derive model-level Elo ratings, which complement newly designed automated metrics that capture behavioral correctness. We evaluate 14 video world models, 9 spatial systems, and 8 embodied candidates under this unified framework. Results reveal remaining reliability gaps across all three tracks: video models exhibit reduced consistency during extended rollouts and revisits, spatial models achieve at best 70.14% placement accuracy and 73.33% edit execution, and embodied models struggle to preserve state across multi-step actions and respond precisely to altered action conditions and physical rules. These findings highlight the need to evaluate world models not only by visual quality, but also by state consistency and the correctness of their responses to actions and interventions.
Text extracted automatically; images, tables and formatting may be missing. Original: https://huggingface.co/papers/2609.24308