Benchmark Almanac

HarnessEval-W

Not in model cards

Video and world models generate rollouts from image and action prompts. An evaluator agent plans checks, spawns sub-agents, gathers spatiotemporal evidence and scores observation, transition and persistence with written reasoning.

A 100-case public set came out on September 2nd, 2026. xbench lists it in its AGI Tracking series. The xbench board has 10 models.

Released
August 2026
Kind
Interactive world models
Level
Expert
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Open-ended
Tasks
Public, plus a private test set
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

A benchmark should deliver more than a scalar score: what makes an evaluation trustworthy is the reasoning that justifies the score. This is especially critical for world models, where judging a rollout requires understanding whether physics, causality, and world state evolve correctly. Humans spot such violations naturally, yet no existing benchmark automates this capability: metrics are computed brute-force, leaving no reasoning chain that can be examined or verified. We introduce HarnessEval-W, an agentified evaluation pipeline that brings the harness paradigm from the LLM ecosystem to world model benchmarking. Rather than applying a fixed rubric, HarnessEval-W interprets the context of each evaluation case, decomposes the evaluation question into measurable subproblems, and spawns specialized sub-agents, each equipped with tailored context and diagnostic tools to reason over its own subproblem. The parent agent then validates the gathered evidence and summarizes it into the final verdict. This hierarchical workflow turns every evaluation into a transparent evidence tree whose complete reasoning chain justifies the result. We apply HarnessEval-W to 18 representative world models over 330 evaluation cases. Its judgments closely align with human preferences while providing verifiable, fine-grained diagnoses of every generated rollout. We open-source the full pipeline as a live benchmark and invite the broad community to contribute to grow new skills and evaluation cases as world models evolve.

Abstract of HarnessEval-W: Agentifying the Evaluation of Visual Worlds (arXiv:2608.16859, CC0)
10
Entries on its own leaderboard, 4 models we track

Dreamina Seedance 2.0 leads with 75.5

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 Dreamina Seedance 2.0 Prompt I2V 75.5
  2. 2 Wan 2.7 Prompt I2V 75.0
  3. 3 Kling 3.0 Prompt I2V 74.4
  4. 4 MiniMax H3 Prompt I2V 74.3
  5. 5 Grok Imagine Video 1.5 Prompt I2V 73.4
  6. 6 FLUX 3 Prompt I2V 72.2
  7. 7 Cosmos3-Super Prompt I2V 71.9
  8. 8 HunyuanVideo 1.5 Prompt I2V 70.3
  9. 9 LingBot World v2 Camera pose 68.8
  10. 10 SANA-WM Native action 68.7

Source: Official HarnessEval-W leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Dreamina Seedance 2.0 75.5 Prompt I2V Official leaderboard
2 Wan 2.7 75.0 Prompt I2V Official leaderboard
3 Kling 3.0 74.4 Prompt I2V Official leaderboard
4 MiniMax H3 74.3 Prompt I2V Official leaderboard
5 Grok Imagine Video 1.5 73.4 Prompt I2V Official leaderboard
6 FLUX 3 72.2 Prompt I2V Official leaderboard
7 Cosmos3-Super 71.9 Prompt I2V Official leaderboard
8 HunyuanVideo 1.5 70.3 Prompt I2V Official leaderboard
9 LingBot World v2 68.8 Camera pose Official leaderboard
10 SANA-WM 68.7 Native action Official leaderboard

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

No dated values yet.

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%