CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 0Reinforcement Learning in RoboticsAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningModel Reduction and Neural Networks

LeWorldModel: Stable End-to-End Joint-Embedding Predictive Architecture from Pixels

Open access
Maes, Lucas, Lidec, Quentin Le, Scieur, Damien, LeCun, Yann, Balestriero, Randall·2026·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2603.19312arXiv 2603.19312
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Joint Embedding Predictive Architectures (JEPAs) offer a compelling framework for learning world models in compact latent spaces, yet existing methods remain fragile, relying on complex multi-term losses, exponential moving averages, pre-trained encoders, or auxiliary supervision to avoid representation collapse. In this work, we introduce LeWorldModel (LeWM), the first JEPA that trains stably end-to-end from raw pixels using only two loss terms: a next-embedding prediction loss and a regularizer enforcing Gaussian-distributed latent embeddings. This reduces tunable loss hyperparameters from six to one compared to the only existing end-to-end alternative. With ~15M parameters trainable on a single GPU in a few hours, LeWM plans up to 48x faster than foundation-model-based world models while remaining competitive across diverse 2D and 3D control tasks. Beyond control, we show that LeWM's latent space encodes meaningful physical structure through probing of physical quantities. Surprise evaluation confirms that the model reliably detects physically implausible events.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

LeWorldModel (LeWM) is an end-to-end Joint-Embedding Predictive Architecture that learns a latent world model directly from raw pixels using only a next-embedding prediction loss and a SIGReg Gaussian-distribution regularizer. It trains stably with 15M parameters on a single GPU and plans up to 48× faster than foundation-model-based world models while remaining competitive on 2D and 3D control tasks.

Key findings

  • LeWM reduces tunable loss hyperparameters from six to one compared with the only existing end-to-end alternative (PLDM), using a two-term objective: prediction loss plus SIGReg anti-collapse regularization.
  • On PushT, LeWM achieves an 18% higher success rate than PLDM and surpasses DINO-WM even when DINO-WM has additional proprioceptive information; training variance on Push-T is 96.0 ± 2.83 for LeWM, 92.0 ± 1.63 for DINO-WM, and 78.0 ± 5.0 for PLDM.
  • Planning is up to 48× faster than foundation-model-based world models, with full planning completing in under one second, while remaining competitive across tasks.
  • Latent space encodes physical structure: probing physical quantities is competitive with DINOv2, temporal latent path straightening emerges without explicit regularization, and violation-of-expectation tests show significantly higher surprise for teleportation perturbations across all three environments (paired t-test, p < 0.01), while cube color perturbation increases are weaker and not significant.

Methods

  • Offline, reward-free trajectories of raw pixel observations and actions; encoder is a ViT-Tiny (~5M parameters) mapping frames to latents, and predictor is a transformer (~10M parameters) with AdaLN action conditioning and causal masking, trained jointly end-to-end with MSE prediction loss plus λ·SIGReg (M = 1024 projections, λ = 0.1).
  • Planning uses latent model predictive control with the Cross-Entropy Method: optimize action sequences to minimize terminal latent goal-matching cost, with horizon 5 (25 environment timesteps due to frame skip 5), 300 sampled sequences, 30 iterations on PushT and 10 elsewhere, top 30 elites.
  • Evaluation spans TwoRoom, PushT, OGBench-Cube, and Reacher against DINO-WM, PLDM, GCBC, GCIQL, and GCIVL; probing uses linear and MLP probes; hardware is a single NVIDIA L40S GPU.

Limitations

  • Stated: planning remains restricted to short horizons; the method relies on offline datasets with sufficient interaction coverage; limited data diversity can impair SIGReg in very simple low-intrinsic-dimensionality environments; and current end-to-end latent world models depend on action labels.
  • Stated future directions include hierarchical world modeling, pretraining on large natural video datasets, and learning action representations via inverse dynamics.
  • Evident from the text: LeWM performs worse than PLDM and DINO-WM on the simplest Two-Room environment, DINO-WM slightly outperforms LeWM on OGBench-Cube, all methods struggle to recover block orientation, and rollouts lose finer details such as end-effector orientation at longer horizons; the CEM planner is also noted as non-convex with no global-optimum guarantee and suffers from the curse of dimensionality.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2603.19312

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 46 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingnone given

    LeWM relies on a simple and stable two-term objective.

    “The method relies on a simple and stable two-term objective that remains robust across architectures and hyperparameter choices, while enabling efficient logarithmictime hyperparameter search.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The offline trajectories sufficiently cover the environment dynamics.
  • Findingnone given

    LeWM achieves strong control performance across diverse 2D and 3D tasks with a compact 15M-parameter model.

    “LeWM achieves strong control performance across diverse 2D and 3D tasks with a compact 15M-parameter model, surpassing existing end-to-end JEPA-based approach while remaining competitive with foundation-model-based world models at substantially lower cost, enabling planning up to 48× faster.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingcitation

    SIGReg regularization term enforces Gaussian-distributed latent embeddings, promoting feature diversity.

    “To prevent trivial collapse, the SIGReg regularization term enforces Gaussian-distributed latent embeddings, promoting feature diversity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [25]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Findingown data

    LeWM's latent space encodes meaningful physical structure through probing of physical quantities.

    “Beyond control, we show that LeWM's latent space encodes meaningful physical structure through probing of physical quantities.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingnone given

    LeWM is an end-to-end JEPA method for learning a latent world model from raw pixels on a single GPU.

    “We propose an end-to-end JEPA method for learning a latent world model from raw pixels on a single GPU.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The offline trajectories sufficiently cover the environment dynamics.
  • May combine two claims. 51
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 47
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    LeWM surpasses existing end-to-end JEPA-based approach while remaining competitive with foundation-model-based world models at substantially lower cost.

    “LeWM achieves strong control performance across diverse 2D and 3D tasks with a compact 15M-parameter model, surpassing existing end-to-end JEPA-based approach while remaining competitive with foundation-model-based world models at substantially lower cost, enabling planning up to 48× faster.”
    • Also stated in: § 4.2 Towards Efficient Planning with WMs · plain
      “LeWM improves over PLDM on the more challenging planning tasks, achieving an 18% higher success rate on PushT while remaining competitive with DINO-WM.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    LeWM can be trained on a single GPU, lowering the barrier to entry for research.

    “Furthermore, LeWM can be trained on a single GPU, lowering the barrier to entry for research.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    LeWM has 15M parameters and can be trained on a single GPU in a few hours.

    “With 15M parameters trainable on a single GPU in a few hours, LeWM plans up to 48× faster than foundation-model-based world models while remaining competitive across diverse 2D and 3D control tasks.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    LeWM achieves a 48× faster planning time, with the full planning completing in under one second while preserving competitive performance across tasks.

    “Moreover, when comparing planning speedups (Fig. 3), LeWM achieves a 48× faster planning time, with the full planning completing in under one second while preserving competitive performance across tasks.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    LeWM achieves competitive performance with both ViT and ResNet-18 encoder architectures, indicating that it is largely agnostic to the choice of vision encoder.

    “Additionally, we examine the impact of the encoder architecture by replacing the default ViT encoder with a ResNet-18 backbone (Tab.8).LeWM achieves competitive performance with both architectures, indicating that it is largely agnostic to the choice of vision encoder.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    LeWM does not employ stop-gradient, exponential moving averages, or additional stabilization heuristics.

    “We do not employ stop-gradient, exponential moving averages, or additional stabilization heuristics.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In OGBench-Cube, the increase in surprise is weaker and not consistently significant.

    “In OGBench-Cube, the increase in surprise is weaker and not consistently significant.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The representation dimension must be sufficiently large for the method to perform well, but performance quickly saturates beyond a certain threshold, suggesting that the approach is robust to the precise choice of encoder capacity.

    “While the representation dimension must be sufficiently large for the method to perform well, performance quickly saturates beyond a certain threshold, suggesting that the approach is robust to the precise choice of encoder capacity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    As shown in Fig. 15, performance drops when the embedding dimension falls below a certain threshold (around 184), while increasing the dimension beyond this value yields diminishing returns and leads to performance saturation.

    “As shown in Fig. 15, performance drops when the embedding dimension falls below a certain threshold (around 184), while increasing the dimension beyond this value yields diminishing returns and leads to performance saturation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    As shown in Tab. 5, the resulting performance exhibits consistently high success rates with low variance across runs, indicating that the training procedure is stable and reproducible.

    “As shown in Tab. 5, the resulting performance exhibits consistently high success rates with low variance across runs, indicating that the training procedure is stable and reproducible.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The teleportation perturbation violates physical continuity and produces a pronounced spike in surprise, while the unperturbed trajectory maintains a low baseline.

    “The teleportation violates physical continuity and produces a pronounced spike in surprise, while the unperturbed trajectory maintains a low baseline.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    LeWM improves over PLDM on the more challenging planning tasks, achieving an 18% higher success rate on PushT while remaining competitive with DINO-WM.

    “LeWM improves over PLDM on the more challenging planning tasks, achieving an 18% higher success rate on PushT while remaining competitive with DINO-WM.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Although reconstruction is never used during training, a decoder trained to reconstruct pixel observations from a single latent embedding (192 dim) is able to recover the visual scene, confirming that the low-dimensional and compact latent space retains sufficient information about the underlying physical state.

    “Although reconstruction is never used during training, the decoder is able to recover the visual scene from the learned representation, confirming that the low-dimensional and compact latent space retains sufficient information about the underlying physical state.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Since only a single hyperparameter needs to be tuned, grid search can be performed efficiently using a simple bisection strategy (O(log n)), whereas PLDM requires search in polynomial time (O(n^6)).

    “Since only a single hyperparameter needs to be tuned, grid search can be performed efficiently using a simple bisection strategy (O(log n)), whereas PLDM requires search in polynomial time (O(n 6 )).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    Early in training, LeWM's decoded images correspond to slow features.

    “Early in training, the decoded images correspond to slow features, a phenomenon previously reported[21].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [21]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Teleportation perturbations produce a pronounced spike in surprise, while unperturbed trajectories maintain a low baseline.

    “The teleportation violates physical continuity and produces a pronounced spike in surprise, while the unperturbed trajectory maintains a low baseline.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Interestingly, temporal straightening emerges naturally over the course of training without any training term explicitly encouraging it (Fig. 17).

    “Interestingly, we observe that temporal straightening emerges naturally over the course of training without any training term explicitly encouraging it (Fig. 17).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    LeWM consistently outperforms PLDM while remaining competitive with representations produced by large pretrained models such as DINOv2 on probing physical quantities.

    “Our method consistently outperforms PLDM while remaining competitive with representations produced by large pretrained models such as DINOv2.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    On PushT, the imagined trajectory closely tracks the real one, accurately capturing both agent and block motion.

    “On PushT, the imagined trajectory closely tracks the real one, accurately capturing both agent and block motion.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Surprise is significantly higher for teleportation perturbations across all three environments (paired t-test, p < 0.01), whereas for the cube color perturbation the increase is weaker and not significant, indicating that the model is more sensitive to physical perturbations than to visual ones.

    “Surprise is significantly higher for teleportation perturbations across all three environments (paired t-test, p < 0.01), whereas for the cube color perturbation the increase is weaker and not significant, indicating that the model is more sensitive to physical perturbations than to visual ones.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Notably, LeWM achieves higher temporal straightness than PLDM despite having no explicit regularizer encouraging it, whereas PLDM employs a regularizer on consecutive latent states that directly promotes temporal smoothness.

    “Notably, LeWM achieves higher temporal straightness than PLDM despite having no explicit regularizer encouraging it, whereas PLDM employs a regularizer on consecutive latent states that directly promotes temporal smoothness.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Empirically, 10 epochs are sufficient to reach the best performance, matching the results reported in the DINO-WM paper.

    “Empirically, we observe that 10 epochs are sufficient to reach the best performance, matching the results reported in the DINO-WM paper.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The t-SNE visualization suggests that the learned representation captures the spatial structure of the environment, preserving neighborhood relationships and relative positions in the latent space.

    “The visualization suggests that the learned representation captures the spatial structure of the environment, preserving neighborhood relationships and relative positions in the latent space.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The performance of SIGReg is largely unaffected by the number of random projections and the number of integration knots, indicating that they do not require careful tuning.

    “First, we analyze the sensitivity of SIGReg to its internal parameters, namely the number of random projections and the number of integration knots.The performance is largely unaffected by these quantities, indicating that they do not require careful tuning.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For the cube color perturbation, the increase in surprise is weaker and not significant.

    “whereas for the cube color perturbation the increase is weaker and not significant”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Gradients are propagated through all components of the loss, and all parameters are optimized jointly in an end-to-end manner.

    “Gradients are propagated through all components of the loss, and all parameters are optimized jointly in an end-to-end manner, resulting in a streamlined and easy-to-implement training procedure.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    As shown in Tab. 8, LeWM achieves competitive performance with both architectures, suggesting that it is agnostic to the choice of vision encoder used during training, though ViT retains a modest advantage.

    “As shown in Tab. 8, LeWM achieves competitive performance with both architectures, suggesting that it is agnostic to the choice of vision encoder used during training, though ViT retains a modest advantage.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    Planning with current latent world models remains restricted to short horizons.

    “First, planning with current latent world models remains restricted to short horizons.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    DINO-WM detects both perturbations in TwoRoom and PushT, but surprise does not increase significantly for either perturbation in OGBench-Cube.

    “While the model detects both perturbations in TwoRoom and PushT, surprise does not increase significantly for either perturbation in OGBench-Cube.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    LeWM's planning time is consistent across environments for a fixed planning setup, narrowing the gap toward real-time control.

    “This planning time remains consistent across environments for a fixed planning setup, narrowing the gap toward real-time control.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Across a variety of continuous control environments and using only raw pixel inputs, LeWM outperforms previous approaches in data efficiency, planning time, training time, and stability while maintaining competitive final task performance.

    “Across a variety of continuous control environments and using only raw pixel inputs, LeWM outperforms previous approaches in data efficiency, planning time, training time, and stability while maintaining competitive final task performance.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    LeWM's two-term objective exhibits smooth and monotonic convergence: the prediction loss decreases steadily while the SIGReg regularization term drops sharply in the early phase of training before plateauing, indicating that the latent distribution quickly approaches the isotropic Gaussian target.

    “The two-term objective of LeWM exhibits smooth and monotonic convergence: the prediction loss decreases steadily while the SIGReg regularization term drops sharply in the early phase of training before plateauing, indicating that the latent distribution quickly approaches the isotropic Gaussian target.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    LeWM training objective is the sum of two terms: a prediction loss and a regularization loss.

    “LeWorldModel training objective is the sum of two terms: a prediction loss and a regularization loss.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The offline trajectories sufficiently cover the environment dynamics.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    On OGBench-Cube, the model preserves the overall scene layout and cube displacement but loses finer details such as end-effector orientation at longer horizons, consistent with the lower probing accuracy on rotational quantities reported in Tab. 4.

    “On OGBench-Cube, the model preserves the overall scene layout and cube displacement but loses finer details such as end-effector orientation at longer horizons, consistent with the lower probing accuracy on rotational quantities reported in Tab. 4.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In practice, the number of projections has negligible impact on downstream performance, making λ the only effective hyperparameter to tune.

    “In practice, we observe that the number of projections has negligible impact on downstream performance (see Sec. 4 and App.G), making λ the only effective hyperparameter to tune.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    LeWM achieves planning speeds comparable to PLDM and up to approximately 50× faster than DINO-WM.

    “allows LeWM to achieve planning speeds comparable to PLDM while being up to ∼ 50× faster than DINO-WM.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Both LeWM and PLDM substantially outperform DINO-WM on the linear probe in TwoRoom.

    “both methods substantially outperform DINO-WM on the linear probe.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    On OGBench-Cube physical latent probing, LeWM matches or outperforms PLDM on most properties and achieves the best results on positional quantities such as block position and end-effector position.

    “LeWM matches or outperforms PLDM on most properties and achieves the best results on positional quantities such as block position and end-effector position.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    On Push-T physical latent probing, LeWM consistently outperforms PLDM while remaining competitive with DINO-WM.

    “LeWM consistently outperforms PLDM while remaining competitive with DINO-WM.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    A small amount of predictor dropout (p = 0.1) yields the best Push-T planning success rate.

    “A small amount of dropout (p = 0.1) yields the best results.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    On Push-T, LeWM success rate remains above 80% across λ ∈ [0.01, 0.2], peaking near λ = 0.09.

    “Success rate remains above 80% across a wide range of values (λ ∈ [0.01, 0.2]), peaking near λ = 0.09.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    These strategies often introduce additional instability or significantly increase training complexity.

    “In practice, these strategies often introduce additional instability or significantly increase training complexity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given

    In collapse, the model maps all inputs to nearly identical representations to trivially satisfy the temporal prediction objective, leading to unusable representations.

    “In this failure mode, the model maps all inputs to nearly identical representations to trivially satisfy the temporal prediction objective leading to unusable representations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Generative world models often assume access to datasets containing reward signals, enabling joint modeling of dynamics and value-relevant information for downstream reinforcement learning.

    “Importantly, many generative WMs assume access to datasets containing reward signals, enabling joint modeling of dynamics and value-relevant information for downstream reinforcement learning.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [3]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [6]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [4]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The original PLDM study reports coefficients that were extensively tuned per environment and dataset, which limits their transferability.

    “Moreover, the original PLDM study reports coefficients that were extensively tuned per environment and dataset, which limits their transferability.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    OGBench-Cube is a continuous 3D robotic manipulation task in which a robotic arm with an end-effector must pick up a cube and place it at a target location.

    “OGBench-Cube is a continuous 3D robotic manipulation task in which a robotic arm with an end-effector must pick up a cube and place it at a target location.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    I-JEPA, V-JEPA, Echo-JEPA, and Brain-JEPA employ an exponential moving average of the target encoder together with stop-gradient updates to stabilize training and prevent representation collapse.

    “Examples include I-JEPA [12] for images, V-JEPA [13,14] for videos, and Echo-JEPA and Brain-JEPA [15,16] for medical data.These approaches typically employ an exponential moving average (EMA) of the target encoder together with stop-gradient (SG) updates to stabilize training and prevent representation collapse.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [12]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [13]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [14]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [15]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [16]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    CEM suffers from the curse of dimensionality and becomes increasingly difficult to apply when the action space is large.

    “Furthermore, CEM suffers from the curse of dimensionality and becomes increasingly difficult to apply when the action space is large.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisereasoning

    In TwoRoom, the agent must navigate from a random starting position in one room to a randomly sampled target location in the other room, which requires passing through the door.

    “The agent (represented as a red dot) must navigate from a random starting position in one room to a randomly sampled target location in the other room, which requires passing through the door.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In Reacher, we consider the variant where success is defined by the perfect alignment of the arm joints with the target configuration required to reach the goal position.

    “Following the setup used in DINO-WM, we consider the variant where success is defined by the perfect alignment of the arm joints with the target configuration required to reach the goal position.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    JEPA methods differ mainly in their target tasks and in the strategies used to learn noncollapsing representations.

    “Since their introduction by LeCun [5], JEPA methods have evolved considerably, differing mainly in their target tasks and in the strategies used to learn noncollapsing representations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [5]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    GCBC trains a goal-conditioned policy to reproduce expert actions given the current observation and a goal observation.

    “GCBC trains a goal-conditioned policy π θ (s t , g) to reproduce expert actions given the current observation s t and a goal observation g.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [48]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    PLDM and DINO-WM's outperformance in Two-Room may be explained by SIGReg encouraging a Gaussian distribution in a high-dimensional latent space while the environment's intrinsic dimensionality is much lower.

    “which may be explained by the SIGReg regularization encouraging a Gaussian distribution in a high-dimensional latent space, while the intrinsic dimensionality of the environment is much lower.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Theoretical understanding of EMA and SG remains limited, as they do not in general correspond to the minimization of a well-defined objective.

    “However, the theoretical understanding of EMA and SG remains limited, as they do not in general correspond to the minimization of a well-defined objective [17].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [17]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    PLDM proposed a method for learning an end-to-end joint-embedding predictive architecture (JEPA).

    “PLDM [22] proposed a method for learning an end-to-end joint-embedding predictive architecture (JEPA).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [22]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    TwoRoom is a simple continuous 2D navigation task introduced by Sobal et al. [22].

    “TwoRoom is a simple continuous 2D navigation task introduced by Sobal et al. [22].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sobal et al. [22]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    In contrast to PLDM, whose objective contains multiple regularization terms, LeWM uses a single regularization term in addition to the prediction loss, making the training dynamics easier to interpret and analyze.

    “In contrast to PLDM, whose objective contains multiple regularization terms, LeWM uses a single regularization term in addition to the prediction loss, making the training dynamics easier to interpret and analyze.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    The TwoRoom environment consists of two rooms separated by a wall with a single door connecting them.

    “The environment consists of two rooms separated by a wall with a single door connecting them.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Overall, LeWM provides a scalable alternative to existing latent world model methods, offering principled training dynamics alongside interpretable and emergent representation properties.

    “Overall, LeWM provides a scalable alternative to existing latent world model methods, offering principled training dynamics alongside interpretable and emergent representation properties.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    To prevent trivial collapse, the SIGReg regularization term enforces Gaussian-distributed latent embeddings, promoting feature diversity.

    “To prevent trivial collapse, the SIGReg regularization term enforces Gaussian-distributed latent embeddings, promoting feature diversity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The violation-of-expectation framework evaluates whether a model assigns higher surprise to events that contradict learned physical regularities.

    “Inspired by the violation-of-expectation (VoE) paradigm used in developmental psychology and recently adopted in machine learning [43][44][45], this framework evaluates whether a model assigns higher surprise to events that contradict learned physical regularities.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [43]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [44]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [45]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Internò et al. [54] leverage temporal straightness measured from DINOv2 features to discriminate AI-generated videos from real ones, demonstrating that this geometric property carries a meaningful signal about the nature of the underlying dynamics.

    “Internò et al. [54] leverage temporal straightness measured from DINOv2 features to discriminate AI-generated videos from real ones, demonstrating that this geometric property carries a meaningful signal about the nature of the underlying dynamics.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [54]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    To avoid collapse, PLDM's approach takes inspiration from the variance-invariance-covariance regularization (VICReg) with extra terms to take into account the temporality of the next state prediction.

    “To avoid collapse, their approach takes inspiration from the variance-invariance-covariance regularization (VICReg, [23]) with extra terms to take into account the temporality of the next state prediction.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Reacher is a continuous control environment from the DeepMind Control Suite [53].

    “Reacher is a continuous control environment from the DeepMind Control Suite [53].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [53]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Following prior work, surprise is quantified by measuring the discrepancy between the model's predicted future observations and the actual observed future.

    “Following prior work, we quantify surprise by measuring the discrepancy between the model's predicted future observations and the actual observed future.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    DINO-WM focused on learning a predictor by leveraging DINOv2 frozen pre-trained representation to avoid collapse.

    “DINO world model (DINO-WM) focused on learning a predictor by leveraging DINOv2 frozen pre-trained representation to avoid collapse.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [18]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    PLDM learns representations end-to-end using VICReg with additional regularization terms, at the cost of known training instabilities and scalability limitations.

    “In contrast, PLDM [21,22] learns representations end-to-end using VICReg [23] with additional regularization terms, at the cost of known training instabilities and scalability limitations [24].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [21]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [22]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [23]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [24]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    By reducing the training objective to only two well-behaved terms, training becomes significantly more stable, removing the need to balance competing gradients from multiple regularizers.

    “These observations highlight a key advantage of LeWM: by reducing the training objective to only two well-behaved terms, the training becomes significantly more stable, removing the need to balance competing gradients from multiple regularizers.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    DINO-WM's slight outperformance on OGBench-Cube may be due to the higher visual complexity and 3D nature of the environment making encoder training more challenging.

    “possibly due to the higher visual complexity and the 3D nature of the environment, which makes encoder training more challenging.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Limited data diversity can affect the effectiveness of the SIGReg regularization in very simple environments with low intrinsic dimensionality, where matching the isotropic Gaussian prior in a high-dimensional latent space becomes challenging.

    “In particular, limited data diversity can affect the effectiveness of the SIGReg regularization in very simple environments with low intrinsic dimensionality, where matching the isotropic Gaussian prior in a high-dimensional latent space becomes challenging.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    GCIQL is an offline reinforcement learning algorithm that avoids querying out-of-distribution actions by learning a value function via expectile regression.

    “Implicit Q-Learning (IQL) [46] is an offline reinforcement learning algorithm that avoids querying out-of-distribution actions by learning a value function via expectile regression.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [46]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    In non-convex settings, there is no guarantee that the solution to which CEM converges is a global optimum.

    “However, in non-convex settings, there is no guarantee that the solution to which CEM converges is a global optimum.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisereasoning

    Because DINO-WM is not trained end-to-end, its loss simply minimizes the predicted next-embedding with the ground truth next-state embedding produced by DINOv2.

    “Because not trained end-to-end, the loss simply is to minimize the predicted next-embedding with the ground trught next-state embedding produced by DINOv2.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Some JEPA approaches rely on pretrained encoders to obtain representations, which avoids collapse but limits the expressivity of representation to the pretrained encoder used.

    “Some approaches rely on pretrained encoders to obtain representations [14,[18][19][20].This avoids collapse but limits the expressivity of representation to the pretrained encoder used.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [14]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [18]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [19]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    GCIVL simplifies IQL by removing the Q-function and learning the value function directly through bootstrapped targets.

    “Implicit Value Learning (IVL) [47] simplifies IQL by removing the Q-function and learning the value function directly through bootstrapped targets.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [47]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    By Cramér-Wold, matching all 1D marginals implies matching the joint distribution, i.e., in the asymptotic limit over M we have the weak convergence result SIGReg(Z) → 0 ⇐⇒ P Z → N (0, I).

    “By Cramér-Wold, matching all 1D marginals implies matching the joint distribution, i.e., in the asymptotic limit over M we have the following weak convergence result SIGReg(Z) → 0 ⇐⇒ P Z → N (0, I).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cramér-Wold

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationnone given

    Our approach still relies on offline datasets with sufficient interaction coverage, which can be costly or difficult to collect.

    “Second, our approach still relies on offline datasets with sufficient interaction coverage, which can be costly or difficult to collect.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Current end-to-end latent world models depend on action labels to predict future states, which can also be costly to obtain.

    “Finally, current end-to-end latent world models depend on action labels to predict future states, which can also be costly to obtain.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    PushT is a continuous 2D manipulation task in which an agent must push a T-shaped block to match a target configuration, with interactions restricted to pushing actions.

    “PushT is a continuous 2D manipulation task in which an agent (represented as a blue dot) must push a T-shaped block to match a target configuration, with interactions restricted to pushing actions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    Assessing normality directly in high-dimensional spaces is challenging, as most classical normality tests are designed for univariate data and do not scale reliably with dimensionality.

    “Assessing normality directly in high-dimensional spaces is challenging, as most classical normality tests are designed for univariate data and do not scale reliably with dimensionality.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    LeWM's latent representation effectively captures the overall scene structure and essential environment dynamics.

    “demonstrating that the latent representation effectively captures the overall scene structure and essential environment dynamics.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    The Reacher task consists of controlling a two-joint robotic arm to reach a target location in a 2D plane.

    “The task consists of controlling a two-joint robotic arm to reach a target location in a 2D plane.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Several works improve stability by incorporating auxiliary signals or architectural components, such as proprioceptive inputs or action decoders.

    “Several works further improve stability by incorporating auxiliary signals or architectural components, such as proprioceptive inputs or action decoders [18,19].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [18]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [19]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    DINO-WM's strong probing performance on certain properties may stem from its foundation-model pretraining on a far more diverse distribution, which likely allows it to capture some physical properties in its embeddings by default.

    “The strong probing performance of DINO-WM on certain properties may stem from its foundation-model pretraining: the DINOv2 encoder is trained on two orders of magnitude more data (∼124M images) spanning a far more diverse distribution, which likely allows it to capture some physical properties in its embeddings by default.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The DINOv2 encoder was trained on two orders of magnitude more data (~124M images) spanning a far more diverse distribution than LeWM's training data.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    DINO-WM's advantage on dynamic and rotational properties likely arises because such quantities benefit from richer visual priors learned during large-scale pretraining.

    “likely because such quantities benefit from the richer visual priors learned during large-scale pretraining.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The DINOv2 encoder was trained on two orders of magnitude more data (~124M images) spanning a far more diverse distribution than LeWM's training data.
85 of 85

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The offline trajectories sufficiently cover the environment dynamics.

    “Trajectories are collected offline from behavior policies with no optimality requirements; they may be pseudo-expert or exploratory, as long as they sufficiently cover the environment dynamics.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The surprise signal in the violation-of-expectation framework measures the model's sensitivity to physical versus visual perturbations.

    “indicating that the model is more sensitive to physical perturbations than to visual ones.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The DINOv2 encoder was trained on two orders of magnitude more data (~124M images) spanning a far more diverse distribution than LeWM's training data.

    “the DINOv2 encoder is trained on two orders of magnitude more data (∼124M images) spanning a far more diverse distribution”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    PLDM explicitly encourages temporal regularity through a dedicated temporal smoothness loss.

    “PLDM explicitly encourages temporal regularity through a dedicated temporal smoothness loss (L time-sim )”
4 of 4

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Control evaluation says three environments but specifies four

    Minor

    The control-evaluation description says there are three environments, then gives settings for TwoRoom, PushT, OGBench-Cube, and Reacher.

  • The stated H-action plan optimizes a state reached after only H−1 actions

    Minor

    Starting at ẑ1 and applying the stated transition rule, actions a1 through aH lead to ẑH+1. The objective instead evaluates ẑH, so its cost does not depend on the last action in the stated plan.

  • CEM iteration count differs across experiment descriptions

    Minor

    The CEM appendix says experiments use 30 optimization steps, but the implementation details specify only 10 iterations outside PushT.

3 of 3

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. Yann LeCun. A path towards autonomous machine intelligence version 0.9. 2, 2022-06-27. Open Review, 62(1):1-62, 2022.
  2. Vincent Micheli, Eloi Alonso, and François Fleuret. Efficient world models with context- aware tokenization. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=BiWIERWBFX.
  3. Jake Bruce, Michael Dennis, Ashley Edwards, Jack Parker-Holder, Yuge Shi, Edward Hughes, Matthew Lai, Aditi Mavalankar, Richie Steigerwald, Chris Apps, Yusuf Aytar, Sarah Bechtle, Feryal Behbahani, Stephanie Chan, Nicolas Heess, Lucy Gonzalez, Simon Osindero, Sherjil Ozair, Scott Reed, Jingwei Zhang, Konrad Zolna, Jeff Clune, Nando de Freitas, Satinder Singh, and Tim Rocktäschel. Genie: Generative interactive environments, 2024. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2402.15391.
  4. Team HunyuanWorld. Hunyuanworld 1.0: Generating immersive, explorable, and interactive 3d worlds from words or pixels. arXiv preprint, 2025.
  5. Mahmoud Assran, Quentin Duval, Ishan Misra, Piotr Bojanowski, Pascal Vincent, Michael Rabbat, Yann LeCun, and Nicolas Ballas. Self-supervised learning from images with a joint- embedding predictive architecture. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 15619-15629, 2023.
  6. Jean Ponce, Basile Terver, Martial Hebert, and Michael Arbel. Dual perspectives on non- contrastive self-supervised learning. In The Fourteenth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2026. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=f5MC1G6XhB.
  7. Gaoyue Zhou, Hengkai Pan, Yann LeCun, and Lerrel Pinto. Dino-wm: World models on pre-trained visual features enable zero-shot planning. In Proceedings of the 42nd International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2025), 2025.
  8. Heejeong Nam, Quentin Le Lidec, Lucas Maes, Yann LeCun, and Randall Balestriero. Causal- jepa: Learning world models through object-level latent interventions, 2026. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2602.11389.
  9. David Ha and Jürgen Schmidhuber. Recurrent world models facilitate policy evolution. Ad- vances in neural information processing systems, 31, 2018.
  10. J Testud, J Richalet, A Rault, and J Papon. Model predictive heuristic control: Applications to industial processes. Automatica, 14(5):413-428, 1978.
  11. Nicklas Hansen, Xiaolong Wang, and Hao Su. Temporal difference learning for model predictive control. In International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 2022.
  12. Nicklas Hansen, Hao Su, and Xiaolong Wang. TD-MPC2: Scalable, robust world models for continuous control. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2024. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=Oxh5CstDJU.
  13. Reuven Y Rubinstein and Dirk P Kroese. The cross-entropy method: a unified approach to combinatorial optimization, Monte-Carlo simulation and machine learning. Springer Science & Business Media, 2004.
  14. Maxime Oquab, Timothée Darcet, Théo Moutakanni, Huy V. Vo, Marc Szafraniec, Vasil Khalidov, Pierre Fernandez, Daniel HAZIZA, Francisco Massa, Alaaeldin El-Nouby, Mido Assran, Nicolas Ballas, Wojciech Galuba, Russell Howes, Po-Yao Huang, Shang-Wen Li, Ishan Misra, Michael Rabbat, Vasu Sharma, Gabriel Synnaeve, Hu Xu, Herve Jegou, Julien Mairal, Patrick Labatut, Armand Joulin, and Piotr Bojanowski. DINOv2: Learning robust visual features without supervision. Transactions on Machine Learning Research, 2024. ISSN 2835-8856. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=a68SUt6zFt. Featured Certification.
  15. Seohong Park, Kevin Frans, Benjamin Eysenbach, and Sergey Levine. OGBench: Bench- marking offline goal-conditioned RL. In The Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2025. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=M992mjgKzI.
  16. Randall Balestriero, Hugues Van Assel, Sami BuGhanem, and Lucas Maes. stable-pretraining- v1: Foundation model research made simple, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2511. 19484.

Cited by

Still being checked.

Related

Authors
Maes, L., Lidec, Q. L., Scieur, D., LeCun, Y., & Balestriero, R.
Affiliations
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
  • New York University (US)
  • John Brown University (US)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2026
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2603.19312
arXiv
2603.19312
OpenAlex
W7140141371
Semantic Scholar
530dab86cb8034bc12a32d21508aaa3f2cc00aa1
Cited by
0
References
36
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Model Reduction and Neural Networks
Keywords
world models, JEPA, latent space regularization, representation collapse, physical reasoning

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-11-01.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-11-01.

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