Benchmark Almanac

YoCausal

Not in model cards

Video generation models are tested for causal and arrow-of-time understanding by comparing real videos with their time-reversed versions, in two levels.

Level 1 uses a Reverse Surprise Index. 51 HF paper upvotes.

In the authors’ words

As video diffusion models (VDMs) advance toward world models, a key question arises: do they truly understand causality, or merely overfit to statistical temporal patterns? Existing benchmarks mostly rely on synthetic data, limiting real-world generalization due to the sim-to-real gap. We present YoCausal, a two-level benchmark inspired by the Violation of Expectation (VoE) paradigm from cognitive science. By temporally reversing real-world videos at zero cost as natural counterfactual samples, YoCausal establishes an arbitrarily extensible evaluation protocol. Level 1 introduces the Reverse Surprise Index (RSI), quantifying arrow-of-time perception via denoising loss. Level 2 introduces the Causality Cognition Index (CCI), which leverages a VLM to stratify datasets into causal and non-causal subsets, disentangling genuine causal reasoning from temporal bias. Evaluation of 13 state-of-the-art VDMs reveals that perceiving the arrow of time does not imply understanding causality, and a significant gap persists relative to human-level causal cognition. Project page: https://www.youzhexie.me/papers/YoCausal/

Abstract of YoCausal: How Far is Video Generation from World Model? A Causality Perspective (arXiv:2605.30346, CC0)
Made by Alaya Lab Released May 2026 Physical prediction All tasks public
Level
Everyday Most adults, without training
Scored
Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
Answers
Short answer A number, word or short string matched to a key.

No scores here yet

No lab, leaderboard or Epoch AI run has reported a score for YoCausal yet.

No lab model card reports it yet

We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.

More in World models

All 34 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. Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B 56.4
  • 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%
  • MVPBench Dropped Models answer video questions on spatial, temporal and intuitive physics. Each question comes in a pair of near-identical videos with opposite answers, so text or single-frame shortcuts fail. gemini-robotics-er-1.5-preview 72.5%