Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 7 minor 63 references

Foresight Without Seeing: Latent Futures for World Action Models

T0 review · 5 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A robot policy can exploit predictive world dynamics without ever generating future video, via a latent key-value interface that keeps action generation fast.

desk verdict A plausible new interface for direct-policy WAMs, honest about its limits, but the central mechanism—that noise-filled future slots carry predictive dynamics at deployment—is asserted rather than demonstrated. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.11605 v1 pith:U7STTXNY submitted 2026-08-12 cs.AI

Jiakai Huang , Zhongbo Wu , Zheng Zhang , Zihan Wang , Shan You , Tao Huang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.AI
keywords worldactionmodellatentfutureskey-valuecachingvideodiffusiontransformerrobotmanipulationLIBEROflowmatchingdynamicsregisters
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

World Action Models that generate future video before acting pay a large inference cost, while direct-policy variants that skip generation lose an explicit route through which predictive dynamics reach the action decoder. ForeWAM offers a resolution: it keeps the fast, direct-policy structure but exposes predictive context through a single video-model prefill over the current visual latent and noise-filled future slots, caching the resulting key-value states for the action decoder to read. A set of dynamics registers, trained against a frozen latent-action teacher, steers those hidden future states toward interaction-induced transitions such as object motion and contact changes. The central claim is that a policy can be future-aware at inference without ever materializing future observations, and the reported numbers -- 96.7% success on LIBERO, 61.6% on LIBERO-Plus, 568 ms action latency (220 ms after distillation) at about one-third of the baseline's parameters -- are offered as evidence. The reason to care: predictive world modeling becomes a conditioning signal rather than a simulated rollout, so foresight no longer has to cost control speed.

What carries the argument

The central object is Future-KV, a latent key-value interface between the video backbone and the action backbone. It performs one Video DiT prefill over the clean current visual latent concatenated with noise-filled future slots, then caches the layer-wise keys and values so that action queries can attend to both current and latent-future context at every denoising step without iterative future-video decoding. The second mechanism is a set of $N_D=16$ dynamics registers, mean-pooled and projected through a trainable head to match a frozen latent-action teacher's target; this training-only signal biases the registers toward interaction-induced transitions. A structured attention mask routes current tokens, registers, and future-slot tokens so action tokens can read the full video sequence, while future-slot tokens integrate the current frame and the registers. These two pathways, one distributed and one compact, are what the paper argues carry predictive dynamics into the action pathway without explicit future generation.

What would settle it

Take the trained ForeWAM and replace the stochastic future slots with a constant value (all zeros) before the prefill, or skip the future-slot tokens entirely while keeping the current-latent keys and values. If LIBERO-Plus success remains near 61.6%, the latent-future interface is not doing the causal work claimed; if success drops substantially, the noise-substrate prefill is genuinely carrying task-relevant context into the action decoder.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

ForeWAM claims to decouple predictive foresight from future-video generation. The deployment-time policy is still a direct policy $p(a_{1:H}|o,l,p)$ with no ground-truth future, no teacher, and no decoded video; the predictive interface is a latent substrate $\tilde{z}^F_{1:T} = \mathrm{concat}(z_{cur}(o), \epsilon_F)$ prefilled once through the Video DiT at $\sigma=1.0$, yielding per-layer key-value states $H_{KV}$ and a dynamics-register slice $D_{\theta}$ that the Action DiT reads throughout denoising. Training combines a flow-matching video loss on demonstrated future latents, a flow-matching action loss, and a latent-action distillation loss that pulls the mean-pooled registers toward a frozen teacher's representation of the demonstrated visual transition. These ingredients are meant to make the noise-filled future slots useful as task-relevant predictive context even though they are stochastic at deployment. The paper reports 96.7% average success on LIBERO and 61.6% on its observed LIBERO-Plus subset (96.9% and 58.2% for the two-step distilled Flash variant), with 568 ms (220 ms Flash) standalone action-generation latency using roughly one-third of Fast-WAM's parameters.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the noise-filled future slots at deployment, after one prefill, actually provide the Action DiT with task-relevant predictive information rather than serving as a fixed stochastic input whose usefulness is only an artifact of training-time supervision.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Predictive world modeling can be used as a conditioning interface rather than a generative step, so future-aware robot policies need not pay iterative video-denoising costs at inference.
  • Training with ground-truth future latents and a teacher, then deploying with neither, means the same policy can benefit from privileged simulation signals without requiring them at execution time.
  • The Future-KV interface is parameter-light: the full policy uses about one-third of Fast-WAM's parameters while staying within roughly a point of its LIBERO success, widening the design space for resource-constrained robot systems.
  • The distilled two-step variant, ForeWAM-Flash, retains LIBERO performance and reaches 220 ms action-generation latency, indicating that the latent-future context survives aggressive action-denoising acceleration.
  • The larger gains on camera-viewpoint and sensor-noise LIBERO-Plus perturbations suggest that latent predictive context can improve robustness to observation distribution shift, though the paper presents this evidence as descriptive rather than coverage-matched.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper compares Future-KV-only and LA-supervision-only configurations, but it does not ablate the future slots themselves while keeping the current-latent prefill, so the causal role of the stochastic substrate is not fully isolated.
  • Because the future slots are stochastic, an immediate extension is to make the substrate action-conditioned or learned, which could strengthen the predictive content of the cache and likely improve performance on contact-heavy tasks.
  • The same latent-future interface could be transferred to settings without paired before/after observations by distilling a latent-action teacher into the registers during pretraining, then fine-tuning on tasks where only current observations are available.
  • The reported design does not require the video prefill to be refreshed after every action chunk; testing whether the cached key-value states can persist across closed-loop steps would clarify how much of the foresight is truly long-horizon.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper introduces ForeWAM, a direct-policy World Action Model that aims to expose predictive visual dynamics to an action-generation transformer without generating or decoding future videos at inference. The proposed architecture performs a single Video DiT prefill over the current observation latent and stochastic future slots filled with noise, caches the resulting layer-wise key-value states, and reuses them as conditioning context during action denoising. In addition, a set of dynamics registers is supervised during training by a frozen latent-action teacher to encourage the hidden states to encode interaction-relevant transitions. The manuscript reports average success rates of 96.7% and 96.9% on the standard LIBERO benchmark, 61.6% on an 'observed subset' of LIBERO-Plus, and reduced action-generation latency (568 ms; 220 ms for an accelerated variant) relative to a reported Fast-WAM baseline, using roughly one-third of the baseline's policy parameters.

Significance. If the central mechanism is genuine, ForeWAM would be a valuable step toward making world-action models efficient at inference while retaining a notion of predictive dynamics. The paper is admirably explicit about several limitations, including the configuration-level nature of the component comparisons and the descriptive rather than causal status of cross-method benchmarks. However, the significance is conditional on demonstrating that the noise-substrate future slots actually carry task-relevant predictive information; as written, the evidence is consistent with alternative explanations. The benchmark numbers are useful but lack uncertainty quantification and matched comparisons, so the reported gains should be interpreted cautiously.

major comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 3.1, Eqs. (3)-(5); Sec. 4.4, Table 4] The central claim that Future-KV exposes predictive dynamics to the Action DiT at deployment is not supported by the presented evidence. At training time the video branch receives ground-truth future latents z1:T (Eq. 8), but at inference the future-slot positions contain fresh noise epsilon_F (Eq. 3). The paper asserts that the usefulness of this noise substrate is learned from the joint video-action objective, yet it provides no analysis of the resulting train/inference distribution shift and no matched intervention showing that the cached K/V states carry task-relevant future information. The component ablation in Table 4 explicitly states that the Base configuration was evaluated under a different coverage profile (10,027 evaluations vs. 1,482 for the other rows) and that the aggregate comparison does not establish the causal contribution of either pathway. Consequently, the 4.9-point gap between Base and Future-KV-only could be attributable to coverage, added capacity, or other confounds. The phrase 'foresight without seeing' and the claim of exposing predictive dynamics therefore overstate what the experiments demonstrate; at minimum, the paper should report a matched ablation with the same evaluation set and provide a diagnostic (e.g., probing the cached states for future information or comparing against a zero-filled future-slot baseline) to support the mechanistic interpretation.
  2. [Sec. 4.1 and Table 2] The LIBERO-Plus evaluation is performed on an unspecified 'observed subset,' and no details are given about which tasks, perturbation intensities, or number of rollouts are included. The headline comparison against Fast-WAM (61.6% vs. 51.5%) uses a number taken from another paper that may have been computed under different evaluation conditions; the authors themselves describe these cross-method differences as 'descriptive rather than coverage-matched causal estimates.' Without a precise definition of the subset and matched evaluation of the baseline under the same protocol, the reported 10.1-point improvement cannot be verified or given an error bar. Please specify the subset composition, per-category evaluation counts, and ideally re-run Fast-WAM under identical conditions.
  3. [Tables 1, 2, and 4] The success-rate tables report no error bars, confidence intervals, or significance tests. For a benchmark with 50 rollouts per task (LIBERO) and unknown per-category counts (LIBERO-Plus), the binomial standard error is substantial; for example, a 0.9-point overall difference on LIBERO corresponds to roughly 1.8 successes across a suite of 200 rollouts, which is within one standard deviation of sampling noise. This is especially concerning for per-category gains such as the +46.1-point camera-viewpoint difference, which may rest on a small number of tasks. The paper should report standard errors or confidence intervals for every success-rate cell, or at minimum per-cell rollout counts.
  4. [Sec. 3.2, Eq. (9), and the Abstract] The paper claims that dynamics registers 'encourage the implicit future states to capture interaction-induced transitions such as object motion, contact changes, and task progress,' but no evidence directly measures these semantic properties. The LA loss (Eq. 9) only encourages the mean-pooled register vector to match a frozen teacher embedding; the paper does not probe or decode the registers to verify that they encode transitions, nor does it isolate the contribution of LA supervision while holding Future-KV fixed (the closest ablation, 'LA supervision only', also omits Future-KV). The semantic claims about what the registers represent are therefore unsupported and should be rephrased as a training objective, not an observed property, or supplemented with a representational analysis.
  5. [Sec. 4.3, Table 3] The inference-latency comparison against Fast-WAM does not state whether the 667 ms figure was measured in the same environment (single A800 GPU), with the same batch size, action horizon, and denoising-step count. If it is a reported number from another paper, the claimed 14.8% and 67.0% reductions are not controlled comparisons. Please clarify the measurement protocol and, if possible, measure the baseline on the same hardware to support the efficiency claims.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Tables 1 and 2] Rows labeled 'Ours' and 'Ours-Flash' should use the model names 'ForeWAM' and 'ForeWAM-Flash' to avoid ambiguity and match the text.
  2. [Figure 1] The caption and the text in Sec. 1 use inconsistent labels: panel (c) is described as 'Direct-policy WAM' in the text but the caption reads 'Direct-policy WAMs'; also, the reference to Fast-WAM in the text should align with the figure's terminology.
  3. [Sec. 3.2] The term 'readability registers' is introduced but never explained; a brief definition or reference is needed for readers unfamiliar with the Wan architecture.
  4. [Sec. A] The action expert is 'initialized from a linearly interpolated Wan2.1 ActionDiT checkpoint'; the term 'ActionDiT' and the interpolation procedure are not defined, so please clarify what this component is and how the interpolation is performed.
  5. [Sec. A] The temporal ratio of 4 between the action and video streams is stated without justification; a short explanation of its effect on the learned dynamics would improve reproducibility.
  6. [Abstract and Conclusion] The abstract and conclusion say the results 'demonstrate' that direct-policy WAMs can retain efficient action prediction while exposing predictive dynamics; given the explicit caveats in Sec. 4.4 and Sec. 5, a more measured wording such as 'suggest' or 'indicate' would better match the evidence.
  7. [Throughout] There are several typographical issues, including the extra space in 'W AMs' throughout the paper and the reference entry 'Shuang Li Yihuai Gao Dorsa Sadigh and Shuran Song. Unified video action model,' which appears incomplete and should be checked.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper's main claims are direct empirical benchmark evaluations, and the deployment-time noise-slot mechanism is an explicitly qualified hypothesis rather than a result forced by definition or self-citation.

full rationale

The central results (91.6% or 96.7% on LIBERO, 61.6% on LIBERO-Plus, latency reductions) are measured outcomes, not quantities derived from assumptions that already contain the conclusions. The deployment-time construction in Eq. 3 fills future slots with pure noise, but the paper does not assert that these slots are equivalent to ground-truth futures; it explicitly states that their 'usefulness is learned from the joint video–action objective rather than from future observations at deployment' (Sec. 3.1, after Eq. 5). That is a mechanistic hypothesis about train/inference transfer, and the paper itself disclaims causal attribution: the Table 4 aggregate comparison 'does not by itself establish the causal contribution of either pathway,' and the Base row is described as 'a contextual reference rather than a matched estimate.' The LA-supervision loss (Eq. 9) uses a frozen external teacher target, and the total objective (Eq. 10) is a standard training loss, not a tautology. The only overlapping-author citation (Kairos Team, 2026) appears in a related-work list and is not load-bearing for any claim or design choice. No equation reduces to a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from author prior work. Concerns about whether the noise-filled substrate actually carries future information at deployment are evidence / correctness issues, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The paper's quantitative claims rest on multiple hand-chosen hyperparameters and on external components (LaWM teacher, Wan2.1). There is no formal derivation; the 'latent futures' are learned conditioning features, not predictions with independent evidence.

free parameters (5)
  • lambda_LA (loss weight) = not reported
    Weight for the latent-action distillation term in Eq. 10; hand-chosen, value not given, benchmark results depend on it.
  • N_D (number of dynamics registers) = 16
    Hand-chosen architectural hyperparameter (Sec. A); not varied in ablations.
  • shift (flow matching time shift) = 5.0
    Flow-matching schedule parameter from Sec. A; standard practice but hand-set.
  • action denoising steps = 10 (ForeWAM), 2 (ForeWAM-Flash)
    Inference schedule; the latency comparison depends directly on this choice.
  • temporal ratio action-to-video = 4
    Maps a 32-step action chunk to 9 video frames (Sec. A); hand-chosen.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Flow matching with a 1000-timestep schedule yields valid generative training (Lipman et al., 2022).
    Used for both video and action losses (Eqs. 6-8).
  • domain assumption The frozen LaWM teacher provides a useful non-executable latent-action target for LIBERO visual transitions.
    Dynamics-register supervision (Eq. 9) depends on the teacher from Chen et al., 2026a, without independent validation on this benchmark.
  • domain assumption The Wan2.1 video DiT, text encoder, and video VAE representations are suitable for LIBERO frames and instructions.
    Architecture is initialized from Wan2.1-T2V-1.3B (Sec. A).
  • ad hoc to paper The usefulness of the noise-substrate prefill at inference is learned from training, not verified.
    Stated in Sec. 3.1 after Eq. 5; this train/inference gap is the weakest assumption of the method.
  • domain assumption LIBERO success rate is a valid measure of task competence.
    All empirical claims use this benchmark without questioning its validity.
invented entities (3)
  • Dynamics registers
    purpose: Compact token group supervised by a latent-action teacher to encode interaction-induced transitions.
    Internal learned tokens; no external falsifiable handle. Ablations show a small gain, but the paper disclaims causal necessity.
  • Stochastic future slots
    purpose: Noise-filled latent positions that give the video prefill a substrate at inference.
    Architectural construct; not an observed future and no direct evidence that they encode future information.
  • Future-KV cache
    purpose: Layer-wise key/value states from a single video prefill, reused during action denoising.
    Implementation mechanism; its contribution is only measured ablatively within the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Foresight Without Seeing: Latent Futures for World Action Models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/U7STTXNY

@misc{pith2026260811605,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Foresight Without Seeing: Latent Futures for World Action Models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/U7STTXNY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.11605}
}
read the original abstract

World Action Models (WAMs) couple future visual prediction with robot action generation, enabling policies to model how the physical world evolves during interaction. Existing WAMs differ in how predictive dynamics are exposed to the action pathway. Explicit-future WAMs provide direct access to predicted scene evolution, but incur substantial inference costs from iterative video denoising. In contrast, direct-policy WAMs efficiently predict actions from the current observation but lack an explicit inference-time interface for exposing predictive dynamics to the Action DiT. To bridge this gap, we propose ForeWAM, a dynamics-conditioned direct-policy WAM that provides predictive context for action generation without decoding future videos. At its core, Future-KV performs a single Video DiT prefill over the current visual latent and stochastic future slots, and reuses the resulting layer-wise key-value states throughout action denoising. We further introduce dynamics registers supervised by a frozen latent action teacher, encouraging the implicit future states to capture interaction-induced transitions such as object motion, contact changes, and task progress. Ground-truth future observations and the teacher are used only during training; deployment requires neither and performs no future video generation. Without embodied robot data pretraining, the standard and accelerated variants of ForeWAM achieve average success rates of 96.7% and 96.9% on LIBERO, respectively. The standard variant further achieves 61.6% success on LIBERO-Plus. These results demonstrate that direct-policy WAMs can retain efficient action prediction while exposing predictive dynamics to the action pathway without explicitly generating future observations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.11605 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. World Action Model paradigms. (a) Cascaded WAMs first generate future observations and then condition action prediction on them. (b) Joint WAMs generate future observations and actions within a unified generative process. (c) Direct-policy WAMs skip future rollout at inference and condition action prediction on a latent world representation extracted from the current observa￾tion. (d) Our ForeWAM retains direct acti… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Dynamics-conditioned Action DiT. During training, demonstrated future frames supervise [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The structured mask routes current tokens [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

    Learning universal policies via text-guided video generation , author=. Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

  2. [2]

    2017 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) , pages=

    Deep visual foresight for planning robot motion , author=. 2017 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) , pages=. 2017 , organization=

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.14803 , year=

    Video prediction policy: A generalist robot policy with predictive visual representations , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.14803 , year=

    arXiv

  4. [4]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.08242 , year=

    Light-WAM: Efficient World Action Models with State-Fusion Action Decoding , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.08242 , year=

    arXiv

  5. [5]

    International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

    Learning to act without actions , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

    work page

  6. [6]

    presented at Int

    LAPA: Latent Action Pretraining from Videos , author=. presented at Int. Conf. Learn. Representations (ICLR), 2025 , year=

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    A Pragmatic

    Wu, Wei and Lu, Fan and Wang, Yunnan and Yang, Shuai and Liu, Shi and Wang, Fangjing and Zhu, Qian and Sun, He and Wang, Yong and Ma, Shuailei and Ren, Yiyu and Zhang, Kejia and Yu, Hui and Zhao, Jingmei and Zhou, Shuai and Qiu, Zhenqi and Xiong, Houlong and Wang, Ziyu and Wang, Zechen and Cheng, Ran and Li, Yong-Lu and Huang, Yongtao and Zhu, Xing and Sh...

    work page

  8. [8]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20314 , year =

    arXiv

Show all 63 references
  1. [9]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.26657 , year =

    Enfold: Folding World Model Imagination into Predictive Representations for Ultra-Efficient Embodied Control , author =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.26657 , year =

    arXiv

  2. [10]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.21257 , year=

    One-step diffusion policy: Fast visuomotor policies via diffusion distillation , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.21257 , year=

    arXiv

  3. [11]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

    Motus: A unified latent action world model , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

  4. [12]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.14734 , year=

    Gr00t n1: An open foundation model for generalist humanoid robots , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.14734 , year=

    arXiv

  5. [13]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.24164 , year=

    _0 : A Vision-Language-Action Flow Model for General Robot Control , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.24164 , year=

    arXiv

  6. [14]

    URL https://arxiv

    Univla: Learning to act anywhere with task-centric latent actions, 2025 , author=. URL https://arxiv. org/abs/2505.06111 , year=

    2025 arXiv

  7. [15]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.21539 , year=

    Worldvla: Towards autoregressive action world model , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.21539 , year=

    arXiv

  8. [16]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.15768 , year=

    Lawam: Latent world action models for efficient dynamics-aware robot policies , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.15768 , year=

  9. [17]

    The International Journal of Robotics Research , volume=

    Diffusion policy: Visuomotor policy learning via action diffusion , author=. The International Journal of Robotics Research , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  10. [18]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.13626 , year=

    Libero-plus: In-depth robustness analysis of vision-language-action models , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.13626 , year=

    arXiv

  11. [19]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.09246 , year=

    Openvla: An open-source vision-language-action model , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.09246 , year=

    arXiv

  12. [20]

    Unified Video Action Model , author=

  13. [21]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02747 , year=

    Flow matching for generative modeling , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02747 , year=

    arXiv

  14. [22]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    Libero: Benchmarking knowledge transfer for lifelong robot learning , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

  15. [23]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.09747 , year=

    Fast: Efficient action tokenization for vision-language-action models , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.09747 , year=

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    5: a vision-language-action model with open-world generalization, 2025 , author=

    0. 5: a vision-language-action model with open-world generalization, 2025 , author=. URL https://arxiv. org/abs/2504.16054 , volume=

    2025 arXiv

  17. [25]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.15922 , year=

    World action models are zero-shot policies , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.15922 , year=

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.16666 , year=

    Fast-wam: Do world action models need test-time future imagination? , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.16666 , year=

    arXiv

  19. [27]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.02792 , year=

    Unified world models: Coupling video and action diffusion for pretraining on large robotic datasets , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.02792 , year=

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.15818 , year=

    Rt-2: Vision-language-action models transfer web knowledge to robotic control , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.15818 , year=

    arXiv

  21. [29]

    7: a steerable generalist robotic foundation model with emergent capabilities, 2026 , author=

    0. 7: a steerable generalist robotic foundation model with emergent capabilities, 2026 , author=. URL https://arxiv. org/abs/2604.15483 , year=

    2026 arXiv

  22. [30]

    International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

    Video language planning , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

  23. [31]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    Prediction with action: Visual policy learning via joint denoising process , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

  24. [32]

    European Conference on Computer Vision , pages=

    Track2act: Predicting point tracks from internet videos enables generalizable robot manipulation , author=. European Conference on Computer Vision , pages=. 2024 , organization=

    2024

  25. [33]

    International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

    Learning to act from actionless videos through dense correspondences , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

  26. [34]

    Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

    Videovla: Video generators can be generalizable robot manipulators , author=. Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

  27. [35]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.15208 , year=

    Flow as the cross-domain manipulation interface , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.15208 , year=

    arXiv

  28. [36]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.06199 , year=

    3dflowaction: Learning cross-embodiment manipulation from 3d flow world model , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.06199 , year=

    arXiv

  29. [37]

    International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

    Latent action pretraining from videos , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

  30. [38]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.19683 , year=

    Mask World Model: Predicting What Matters for Robust Robot Policy Learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.19683 , year=

    arXiv

  31. [39]

    2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) , pages=

    Ardup: Active region video diffusion for universal policies , author=. 2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) , pages=. 2024 , organization=

    2024

  32. [40]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.16195 , year=

    S-vam: Shortcut video-action model by self-distilling geometric and semantic foresight , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.16195 , year=

  33. [41]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.06158 , year=

    Gr-2: A generative video-language-action model with web-scale knowledge for robot manipulation , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.06158 , year=

    arXiv

  34. [42]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.17502 , year=

    Rynnvla-002: A unified vision-language-action and world model , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.17502 , year=

    arXiv

  35. [43]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.16163 , year=

    Cosmos policy: Fine-tuning video models for visuomotor control and planning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.16163 , year=

    arXiv

  36. [44]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.27607 , year=

    Dual-stream diffusion for world-model augmented vision-language-action model , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.27607 , year=

    arXiv

  37. [45]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.16023 , year=

    CoVAR: Co-generation of Video and Action for Robotic Manipulation via Multi-Modal Diffusion , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.16023 , year=

  38. [46]

    International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

    Unified diffusion VLA: Vision-language-action model via joint discrete denosing diffusion process , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

  39. [47]

    7: A latent world-action model from egocentric videos , author=

    Being-h0. 7: A latent world-action model from egocentric videos , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.00078 , year=

    arXiv

  40. [48]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.14732 , year=

    World-value-action model: Implicit planning for vision-language-action systems , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.14732 , year=

    arXiv

  41. [49]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.17259 , year=

    Frappe: Infusing world modeling into generalist policies via multiple future representation alignment , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.17259 , year=

  42. [50]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.20057 , year=

    AdaWorldPolicy: World-Model-Driven Diffusion Policy with Online Adaptive Learning for Robotic Manipulation , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.20057 , year=

  43. [51]

    International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

    X-vla: Soft-prompted transformer as scalable cross-embodiment vision-language-action model , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

  44. [52]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.11236 , year=

    Abot-m0: Vla foundation model for robotic manipulation with action manifold learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.11236 , year=

    arXiv

  45. [53]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.15659 , year=

    Flare: Robot learning with implicit world modeling , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.15659 , year=

    arXiv

  46. [54]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.12215 , year=

    Lda-1b: Scaling latent dynamics action model via universal embodied data ingestion , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.12215 , year=

    arXiv

  47. [55]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.27792 , year=

    Motubrain: An advanced world action model for robot control , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.27792 , year=

    arXiv

  48. [56]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.17240 , year=

    GigaWorld-Policy: An Efficient Action-Centered World--Action Model , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.17240 , year=

  49. [57]

    2025 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages=

    Cot-vla: Visual chain-of-thought reasoning for vision-language-action models , author=. 2025 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages=. 2025 , organization=

    2025

  50. [58]

    International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

    Unleashing large-scale video generative pre-training for visual robot manipulation , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

  51. [59]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.12213 , year=

    Octo: An open-source generalist robot policy , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.12213 , year=

    arXiv

  52. [60]

    International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

    Rdt-1b: a diffusion foundation model for bimanual manipulation , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , volume=

  53. [61]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.06817 , year=

    Rt-1: Robotics transformer for real-world control at scale , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.06817 , year=

    arXiv

  54. [62]

    Size-aware Contrastive Imitation Learning for Language-conditioned Multi-task Robotic Manipulation , author=

  55. [63]

    2026 , eprint=

    Kairos: A Regret-Aware Native World-Action Model Stack for Physical AI , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.