World-in-World
Closed-loop platform: world models plan for embodied agents in four environments via a standard action API. Scored by task success.
Prioritizes task success over visual quality. Finds visual quality alone does not guarantee success and controllability matters more.
- Released
- October 2025
- Kind
- Interactive world models
- Level
- Everyday
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Agent task
- Tasks
- All public
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Generative world models (WMs) can now simulate worlds with striking visual realism, which naturally raises the question of whether they can endow embodied agents with predictive perception for decision making. Progress on this question has been limited by fragmented evaluation: most existing benchmarks adopt open-loop protocols that emphasize visual quality in isolation, leaving the core issue of embodied utility unresolved, i.e., do WMs actually help agents succeed at embodied tasks? To address this gap, we introduce World-in-World, the first open platform that benchmarks WMs in a closed-loop world that mirrors real agent-environment interactions. World-in-World provides a unified online planning strategy and a standardized action API, enabling heterogeneous WMs for decision making. We curate four closed-loop environments that rigorously evaluate diverse WMs, prioritize task success as the primary metric, and move beyond the common focus on visual quality; we also present the first data scaling law for world models in embodied settings. Our study uncovers three surprises: (1) visual quality alone does not guarantee task success, controllability matters more; (2) scaling post-training with action-observation data is more effective than upgrading the pretrained video generators; and (3) allocating more inference-time compute allows WMs to substantially improve closed-loop performance.
Runway Gen-4 leads with 64.8%
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 Runway Gen-4 zero-shot video 64.8%
- 2 Wan2.1 post-trained video 62.6%
- 3 SVD post-trained video 61%
- 4 Cosmos-P2 post-trained video 60.3%
- 5
Wan 2.2 A14B zero-shot video 59.5%
- 6 Hunyuan zero-shot video 57.7%
- 7 LTXVideo post-trained video 57.5%
- 8 SE3DS other 57.5%
- 9 NWM other 57.4%
- 10 Pathdreamer other 57%
- 11 Wan2.2 5B post-trained video 56.3%
Source: Official World-in-World leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Runway Gen-4 | 64.8% | zero-shot video | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | Wan2.1 | 62.6% | post-trained video | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | SVD | 61% | post-trained video | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | Cosmos-P2 | 60.3% | post-trained video | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | | 59.5% | zero-shot video | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | Hunyuan | 57.7% | zero-shot video | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | LTXVideo | 57.5% | post-trained video | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | SE3DS | 57.5% | other | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | NWM | 57.4% | other | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | Pathdreamer | 57% | other | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | Wan2.2 5B | 56.3% | post-trained video | 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
- 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%