Benchmark Almanac

HappyWorld-Bench

HappyOyster 1262.6 tops its leaderboard
Not in model cards

World models are tested on the quality of the worlds they generate and on staying consistent and responsive while agents explore, interact and modify them.

Uses a hierarchical capability framework. 59 upvotes on Hugging Face papers.

Made by
Alibaba
Released
September 2026
Kind
Interactive world models
Level
Everyday
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Open-ended
Tasks
All public

In the authors’ words

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.

Abstract of HappyWorld-Bench (arXiv:2609.24308, CC0)
14
Entries on its own leaderboard, 0 models we track

HappyOyster tops the leaderboard with 1262.6

Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders.

  1. 1 HappyOyster 1262.6
  2. 2 Genie 3 1206.4
  3. 3 JoyAI-Echo 1147.2
  4. 4 Alaya-EVOKE 1131.9
  5. 5 Lingbot-World-v2 1115.2
  6. 6 Cosmos3 1091.9
  7. 7 Yume1.5 1062.6
  8. 8 Lyra 2.0 1058.1
  9. 9 DreamX-World 1040.9
  10. 10 MatrixGame-3.0 942.9
  11. 11 SANA-WM 916.5
  12. 12 MatrixGame-2.0 856.2
  13. 13 ABot-world 842.9
  14. 14 Open-Oasis 324.0

Source: Official HappyWorld-Bench leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 HappyOyster 1262.6 Official leaderboard
2 Genie 3 1206.4 Official leaderboard
3 JoyAI-Echo 1147.2 Official leaderboard
4 Alaya-EVOKE 1131.9 Official leaderboard
5 Lingbot-World-v2 1115.2 Official leaderboard
6 Cosmos3 1091.9 Official leaderboard
7 Yume1.5 1062.6 Official leaderboard
8 Lyra 2.0 1058.1 Official leaderboard
9 DreamX-World 1040.9 Official leaderboard
10 MatrixGame-3.0 942.9 Official leaderboard
11 SANA-WM 916.5 Official leaderboard
12 MatrixGame-2.0 856.2 Official leaderboard
13 ABot-world 842.9 Official leaderboard
14 Open-Oasis 324.0 Official leaderboard

No lab model card reports it yet

We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.

More in World models

All 39 in World models
  • AgentWorldBench In use Language world models predict the next environment observation after an agent action, in 7 domains from MCP and search to Android and desktop OS. A judge model scores each prediction against the real observation on five dimensions. GPT-5.4 58.3
  • IntPhys 2 In use Models watch simulated videos and judge whether each event is physically possible, testing object permanence, immutability, continuity and solidity. Scored by accuracy. Muse Spark Open 68.3%
  • QwenWorldBench Fading Models act as world models that simulate agent environments in 7 domains, such as terminal, web, and Android. A rubric judge scores five dimensions. Qwen3.7-Plus 62.1%
  • VPCT Fading Models view an image of a ball, ramps, and three buckets and predict which bucket the ball falls into. Scored by accuracy on 100 problems. Gemini 3 Pro 91%
  • ContPhy Fading Models infer physical properties such as mass and density of fluids and soft bodies from videos and predict their dynamics. Seed2.0 Pro 67.4%
  • RBench Only in system cards 650 image+text prompts for robot video generation (tasks and embodiments). MLLM judge scores task completion, physical plausibility, stability. Wan 2.6 60.7%