CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 19Generative Adversarial Networks and Image SynthesisMultimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsModel Reduction and Neural Networks

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Do generative video models understand physical principles?

Open access
Motamed, Saman, Culp, Laura, Swersky, Kevin, Jaini, Priyank, Geirhos, Robert·2025·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2501.09038arXiv 2501.09038
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

AI video generation is undergoing a revolution, with quality and realism advancing rapidly. These advances have led to a passionate scientific debate: Do video models learn "world models" that discover laws of physics -- or, alternatively, are they merely sophisticated pixel predictors that achieve visual realism without understanding the physical principles of reality? We address this question by developing Physics-IQ, a comprehensive benchmark dataset that can only be solved by acquiring a deep understanding of various physical principles, like fluid dynamics, optics, solid mechanics, magnetism and thermodynamics. We find that across a range of current models (Sora, Runway, Pika, Lumiere, Stable Video Diffusion, and VideoPoet), physical understanding is severely limited, and unrelated to visual realism. At the same time, some test cases can already be successfully solved. This indicates that acquiring certain physical principles from observation alone may be possible, but significant challenges remain. While we expect rapid advances ahead, our work demonstrates that visual realism does not imply physical understanding. Our project page is at https://physics-iq.github.io; code at https://github.com/google-deepmind/physics-IQ-benchmark.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2501.09038

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 57

  1. [4]4. Horace B Barlow et al. Possible principles underlying the transformation of sensory messages. Sensory communication , 1(01):217-233, 1961.
  2. [6]6. Karl Friston. A theory of cortical responses. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological sciences , 360(1456):815-836, 2005.
  3. [7]7. Robert Geirhos, J¨ orn-Henrik Jacobsen, Claudio Michaelis, Richard Zemel, Wieland Brendel, Matthias Bethge, and Felix A Wichmann. Shortcut learning in deep neural networks. Nature Machine Intelligence , 2(11):665-673, 2020.
  4. [8]8. Bingyi Kang, Yang Yue, Rui Lu, Zhijie Lin, Yang Zhao, Kaixin Wang, Gao Huang, and Jiashi Feng. How far is video generation from world model: A physical law perspective. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.02385 , 2024. · arXiv
  5. [12]12. Andreas Blattmann, Tim Dockhorn, Sumith Kulal, Daniel Mendelevitch, Maciej Kilian, Dominik Lorenz, Yam Levi, Zion English, Vikram Voleti, Adam Letts, et al. Stable video diffusion: Scaling latent video diffusion models to large datasets. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.15127 , 2023. · arXiv
  6. [12]12. and Felix Berkenkamp, editors, Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning , volume 235 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research , pages 25105-25124. PMLR, 21-27 Jul 2024. URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v235/kondratyuk24a.html.
  7. [14]14. Robert Geirhos, Carlos RM Temme, Jonas Rauber, Heiko H Sch¨ utt, Matthias Bethge, and Felix A Wichmann. Generalisation in humans and deep neural networks. Advances in neural information processing systems , 31, 2018.
  8. [15]15. Dan Hendrycks and Thomas Dietterich. Benchmarking neural network robustness to common corruptions and perturbations. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2018.
  9. [16]16. Aarohi Srivastava, Abhinav Rastogi, Abhishek Rao, Abu Awal Md Shoeb, Abubakar Abid, Adam Fisch, Adam R Brown, Adam Santoro, Aditya Gupta, Adri` a Garriga-Alonso, et al. Beyond the imitation game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.04615 , 2022. · arXiv
  10. [18]18. Hsiao-Yu Tung, Mingyu Ding, Zhenfang Chen, Daniel Bear, Chuang Gan, Josh Tenenbaum, Dan Yamins, Judith Fan, and Kevin Smith. Physion++: Evaluating physical scene understanding that requires online inference of different physical properties. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 36, 2024.
  11. [19]19. Tayfun Ates, M Samil Atesoglu, Cagatay Yigit, Ilker Kesen, Mert Kobas, Erkut Erdem, Aykut Erdem, Tilbe Goksun, and Deniz Yuret. Craft: A benchmark for causal reasoning about forces and interactions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2012.04293 , 2020. · arXiv
  12. [20]20. Ronan Riochet, Mario Ynocente Castro, Mathieu Bernard, Adam Lerer, Rob Fergus, V´ eronique Izard, and Emmanuel Dupoux. IntPhys: A framework and benchmark for visual intuitive physics reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.07616 , 2018. · arXiv
  13. [21]21. Michael McCloskey, Alfonso Caramazza, and Bert Green. Curvilinear motion in the absence of external forces: Naive beliefs about the motion of objects. Science , 210(4474):1139-1141, 1980.
  14. [22]22. Michael McCloskey. Intuitive physics. Scientific american , 248(4):122-131, 1983.
  15. [23]23. Philip J Kellman and Elizabeth S Spelke. Perception of partly occluded objects in infancy. Cognitive psychology , 15(4):483-524, 1983.
  16. [24]24. Elizabeth S Spelke, Karen Breinlinger, Janet Macomber, and Kristen Jacobson. Origins of knowledge. Psychological review , 99(4):605, 1992.
  17. [25]25. Elizabeth S Spelke, Roberta Kestenbaum, Daniel J Simons, and Debra Wein. Spatiotemporal continuity, smoothness of motion and object identity in infancy. British journal of developmental psychology , 13(2):113-142, 1995.
  18. [26]26. Alison Gopnik, Clark Glymour, David M Sobel, Laura E Schulz, Tamar Kushnir, and David Danks. A theory of causal learning in children: causal maps and bayes nets. Psychological review , 111(1):3, 2004.
  19. [27]27. Rebecca Saxe and Susan Carey. The perception of causality in infancy. Acta psychologica , 123(1-2):144-165, 2006.
  20. [28]28. Pulkit Agrawal, Ashvin V Nair, Pieter Abbeel, Jitendra Malik, and Sergey Levine. Learning to poke by poking: Experiential learning of intuitive physics. Advances in neural information processing systems , 29, 2016.
  21. [29]29. James R Kubricht, Keith J Holyoak, and Hongjing Lu. Intuitive physics: Current research and controversies. Trends in cognitive sciences , 21(10):749-759, 2017.
  22. [30]30. Joshua B Tenenbaum, Charles Kemp, Thomas L Griffiths, and Noah D Goodman. How to grow a mind: Statistics, structure, and abstraction. science , 331(6022):1279-1285, 2011.
  23. [31]31. Luis S Piloto, Ari Weinstein, Peter Battaglia, and Matthew Botvinick. Intuitive physics learning in a deep-learning model inspired by developmental psychology. Nature human behaviour , 6 (9):1257-1267, 2022.
  24. [34]34. Meng Cao, Haoran Tang, Haoze Zhao, Hangyu Guo, Jiaheng Liu, Ge Zhang, Ruyang Liu, Qiang Sun, Ian Reid, and Xiaodan Liang. Physgame: Uncovering physical commonsense violations in gameplay videos. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01800 , 2024. · arXiv
  25. [35]35. Niket Agarwal, Arslan Ali, Maciej Bala, Yogesh Balaji, Erik Barker, Tiffany Cai, Prithvijit Chattopadhyay, Yongxin Chen, Yin Cui, Yifan Ding, et al. Cosmos world foundation model platform for physical AI. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.03575 , 2025. · arXiv
  26. [36]36. Anoop Cherian, Radu Corcodel, Siddarth Jain, and Diego Romeres. LLMPhy: Complex physical reasoning using large language models and world models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.08027 , 2024. · arXiv
  27. [37]37. Fabien Baradel, Natalia Neverova, Julien Mille, Greg Mori, and Christian Wolf. Cophy: Counterfactual learning of physical dynamics. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.12000 , 2019. · arXiv
  28. [38]38. Kexin Yi, Chuang Gan, Yunzhu Li, Pushmeet Kohli, Jiajun Wu, Antonio Torralba, and Joshua B Tenenbaum. Clevrer: Collision events for video representation and reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.01442 , 2019. · arXiv
  29. [39]39. Nazneen Fatema Rajani, Rui Zhang, Yi Chern Tan, Stephan Zheng, Jeremy Weiss, Aadit Vyas, Abhijit Gupta, Caiming Xiong, Richard Socher, and Dragomir Radev. Esprit: Explaining solutions to physical reasoning tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.00730 , 2020. · arXiv
  30. [41]41. Daochang Liu, Junyu Zhang, Anh-Dung Dinh, Eunbyung Park, Shichao Zhang, and Chang Xu. Generative physical AI in vision: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.10928 , 2025. · arXiv
  31. [43]43. Alain Hore and Djemel Ziou. Image quality metrics: Psnr vs. ssim. In 2010 20th international conference on pattern recognition , pages 2366-2369. IEEE, 2010.
  32. [44]44. Zhou Wang, Alan C Bovik, Hamid R Sheikh, and Eero P Simoncelli. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE transactions on image processing , 13(4):600-612, 2004.
  33. [45]45. Thomas Unterthiner, Sjoerd Van Steenkiste, Karol Kurach, Raphael Marinier, Marcin Michalski, and Sylvain Gelly. Towards accurate generative models of video: A new metric & challenges. arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.01717 , 2018. · arXiv
  34. [46]46. Richard Zhang, Phillip Isola, Alexei A Efros, Eli Shechtman, and Oliver Wang. The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 586-595, 2018.
  35. [47]47. Ziqi Huang, Yinan He, Jiashuo Yu, Fan Zhang, Chenyang Si, Yuming Jiang, Yuanhan Zhang, Tianxing Wu, Qingyang Jin, Nattapol Chanpaisit, et al. Vbench: Comprehensive benchmark suite for video generative models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 21807-21818, 2024.
  36. [48]48. Ziqi Huang, Fan Zhang, Xiaojie Xu, Yinan He, Jiashuo Yu, Ziyue Dong, Qianli Ma, Nattapol Chanpaisit, Chenyang Si, Yuming Jiang, et al. Vbench++: Comprehensive and versatile benchmark suite for video generative models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.13503 , 2024. · arXiv
  37. [49]49. Xuan He, Dongfu Jiang, Ge Zhang, Max Ku, Achint Soni, Sherman Siu, Haonan Chen, Abhranil Chandra, Ziyan Jiang, Aaran Arulraj, et al. Videoscore: Building automatic metrics to simulate fine-grained human feedback for video generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.15252 , 2024. · arXiv
  38. [50]50. Songwei Ge, Aniruddha Mahapatra, Gaurav Parmar, Jun-Yan Zhu, and Jia-Bin Huang. On the content bias in frechet video distance. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages 7277-7288, June 2024.
  39. [51]51. Gemini Team Google: Petko Georgiev and 1133 other authors. Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of context. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.05530 , 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.05530. · arXiv
  40. [52]52. Richard E Nisbett and Timothy D Wilson. Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological review , 84(3):231, 1977.
  41. [54]54. Shane Storks, Qiaozi Gao, Yichi Zhang, and Joyce Chai. Tiered reasoning for intuitive physics: Toward verifiable commonsense language understanding. In Findings of Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) 2021 , 2021.
  42. [55]55. Luca Weihs, Amanda Yuile, Ren´ ee Baillargeon, Cynthia Fisher, Gary Marcus, Roozbeh Mottaghi, and Aniruddha Kembhavi. Benchmarking progress to infant-level physical reasoning in ai. Transactions on Machine Learning Research , 2022.
  43. [56]56. Marcel Binz and Eric Schulz. Using cognitive psychology to understand GPT-3. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 120(6):e2218523120, 2023.
  44. [57]57. Serwan Jassim, Mario Holubar, Annika Richter, Cornelius Wolff, Xenia Ohmer, and Elia Bruni. GRASP: A novel benchmark for evaluating language grounding and situated physics understanding in multimodal language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.09048 , 2023. · arXiv
  45. [58]58. Luca M Schulze Buschoff, Elif Akata, Matthias Bethge, and Eric Schulz. Visual cognition in multimodal large language models. Nature Machine Intelligence , pages 1-11, 2025.
  46. [59]59. Pooyan Rahmanzadehgervi, Logan Bolton, Mohammad Reza Taesiri, and Anh Totti Nguyen. Vision language models are blind. In Proceedings of the Asian Conference on Computer Vision , pages 18-34, 2024.
  47. [60]60. John Hewitt and Christopher D Manning. A structural probe for finding syntax in word representations. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) , pages 4129-4138, 2019.
  48. [61]61. Vipula Rawte, Amit Sheth, and Amitava Das. A survey of hallucination in large foundation models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.05922 , 2023. · arXiv
  49. [62]62. Elizabeth S Spelke. The origins of physical knowledge. Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press , 1988.
  50. [63]63. Ren´ ee Baillargeon. The acquisition of physical knowledge in infancy: A summary in eight lessons. Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development , pages 47-83, 2002.
  51. [64]64. Michele Vicovaro. Grounding intuitive physics in perceptual experience. Journal of Intelligence , 11(10):187, 2023.
  52. [65]65. Michael B Chang, Tomer Ullman, Antonio Torralba, and Joshua B Tenenbaum. A compositional object-based approach to learning physical dynamics. arXiv preprint arXiv:1612.00341 , 2016. · arXiv
  53. [66]66. Jason Fischer and Bradford Z Mahon. What tool representation, intuitive physics, and action have in common: The brain's first-person physics engine. Cognitive neuropsychology , 38 (7-8):455-467, 2021.
  54. [67]67. Yichen Li, YingQiao Wang, Tal Boger, Kevin A Smith, Samuel J Gershman, and Tomer D Ullman. An approximate representation of objects underlies physical reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 2023.
  55. [69]69. Aaron Jaech, Adam Kalai, Adam Lerer, Adam Richardson, Ahmed El-Kishky, Aiden Low, Alec Helyar, Aleksander Madry, Alex Beutel, Alex Carney, et al. OpenAI o1 system card. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.16720 , 2024. · arXiv
  56. [70]70. Charlie Snell, Jaehoon Lee, Kelvin Xu, and Aviral Kumar. Scaling LLM test-time compute optimally can be more effective than scaling model parameters. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.03314 , 2024. · arXiv
  57. [71]71. Nanye Ma, Shangyuan Tong, Haolin Jia, Hexiang Hu, Yu-Chuan Su, Mingda Zhang, Xuan Yang, Yandong Li, Tommi Jaakkola, Xuhui Jia, et al. Inference-time scaling for diffusion models beyond scaling denoising steps. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.09732 , 2025. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Motamed, S., Culp, L., Swersky, K., Jaini, P., & Geirhos, R.
Affiliations
  • Sofia University "St. Kliment Ohridski" (BG)
  • Google DeepMind (United Kingdom) (GB)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
Pages
948-958
ISSN
2472-6737 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2501.09038
arXiv
2501.09038
OpenAlex
W7160286610
Cited by
19
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 1
FWCI
150.08
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Model Reduction and Neural Networks
Keywords
generative video models, world models, fluid dynamics, optics, solid mechanics, magnetism, thermodynamics, visual realism, AI video generation, Sora

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review