WorldModelBench
Video generators judged as world models on instruction following and physics adherence in application domains. Human labels and a fine-tuned judge.
67K crowd-sourced human labels used to fine-tune a 2B judge that automates scoring.
- Released
- February 2025
- Kind
- Video world models
- Scored
- Graded by a model
- Answers
- Open-ended
- Tasks
- All public
In the authors’ words
Video generation models have rapidly progressed, positioning themselves as video world models capable of supporting decision-making applications like robotics and autonomous driving. However, current benchmarks fail to rigorously evaluate these claims, focusing only on general video quality, ignoring important factors to world models such as physics adherence. To bridge this gap, we propose WorldModelBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate the world modeling capabilities of video generation models in application-driven domains. WorldModelBench offers two key advantages: (1) Against to nuanced world modeling violations: By incorporating instruction-following and physics-adherence dimensions, WorldModelBench detects subtle violations, such as irregular changes in object size that breach the mass conservation law - issues overlooked by prior benchmarks. (2) Aligned with large-scale human preferences: We crowd-source 67K human labels to accurately measure 14 frontier models. Using our high-quality human labels, we further fine-tune an accurate judger to automate the evaluation procedure, achieving 8.6% higher average accuracy in predicting world modeling violations than GPT-4o with 2B parameters. In addition, we demonstrate that training to align human annotations by maximizing the rewards from the judger noticeably improve the world modeling capability. The website is available at https://worldmodelbench-team.github.io.
KLING tops the leaderboard with 9.10
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 KLING 9.10
- 2 Minimax 8.92
- 3 Mochi 1-official 8.66
- 4 Runway 8.64
- 5 Luma 8.24
- 6 OpenSoraPlan-T2V 8.04
- 7 Mochi 1 7.91
- 8 CogVideoX-T2V 7.65
- 9 CogVideoX-I2V 7.08
- 10 Pandora 6.90
- 11 T2V-Turbo 6.56
- 12 OpenSora-T2V 6.17
- 13 OpenSora-I2V 5.82
Source: Official WorldModelBench leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | KLING | 9.10 | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | Minimax | 8.92 | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | Mochi 1-official | 8.66 | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | Runway | 8.64 | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | Luma | 8.24 | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | OpenSoraPlan-T2V | 8.04 | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | Mochi 1 | 7.91 | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | CogVideoX-T2V | 7.65 | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | CogVideoX-I2V | 7.08 | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | Pandora | 6.90 | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | T2V-Turbo | 6.56 | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | OpenSora-T2V | 6.17 | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | OpenSora-I2V | 5.82 | Nov 2024 | 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
- 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%