Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Video generation becomes controllable when agents first build an editable 3D+T physical world that then drives frozen foundation models as neural shaders.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review

2026-07-15 10:19 UTC pith:ABY24G6Y

load-bearing objection Solid systems paper on a media-oriented 4D controller stack; the industrial motivation and platform design are real, but the load-bearing white-box conditioning claim is only preference-tested, not parameter-error-tested. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2606.31946 v2 pith:ABY24G6Y submitted 2026-06-30 cs.CV

World Narrative Model for Highly Controllable Video Generation: A Paradigm Shift from Pixel Sampling to Physical World Orchestration

Ye Chen , Xuanhong Chen , Yupeng Zhu , Liming Tan , Zhewen Wan , Yuxuan Xiong , Tielong Wang , Jinfan Liu
show 18 more authors
Wuze Zhang Xiongzhen Zhang Feifei Li Xianglin Luo Zhehan Zhao Zhifan Zhang Laisheng Kou Zhujin Liang Yugang Chen Muchun Chen Xu Miao Yijing Zhang Xiaojie Sheng Qiang Hu Jialiang Chen Weimin Zhang Wenjun Zhang Bingbing Ni
This is my paper
classification cs.CV
keywords video generationcontrollabilityworld narrative model4D pre-visualizationphysical parameter controlneural shaderhuman-AI collaboration
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Current video generators treat footage as high-dimensional pixel sampling and give creators no quantitative way to set geometry, motion, camera paths, or lighting, so professional work collapses into expensive trial-and-error regeneration. This paper claims the remedy is to split the task: collaborative agents translate sparse multimodal inputs into a fully editable instance-level 3D-plus-time world narrative of scene layout, assets, skeleton motions, trajectories, camera, and lights. That structured blueprint then conditions any existing video foundation model, frozen or lightly adapted, which acts only as a neural shader. The authors report that the resulting videos match creator intent on layout, motion, and cinematography far more reliably than text-only or strongest multi-reference baselines, while cutting generation trials per shot by roughly two-thirds for both novices and professionals. Because the architecture is modular, world representation, control agents, and adapters can each be improved independently.

Core claim

True industrial controllability of video generation is achieved by decoupling what to render from how to render: an explicit, instance-level 4D (3D+T) world narrative, constructed by collaborative agents from sparse multimodal inputs, serves as a deterministic structural blueprint that drives frozen or lightly adapted video foundation models to produce final pixels.

What carries the argument

The World Narrative Model (WNM): a controller that produces a fully editable instance-level 3D+T parametric representation (scene geometry, object layouts, skeleton motions and trajectories, camera and lighting parameters) which then conditions existing video foundation models as neural shaders, typically via rendered white-box frames or lightweight adapters.

Load-bearing premise

That coarse, non-photoreal white-box frames encoding poses, layouts, and camera views are a strong enough control signal for commercial video models to realize quantitative physical parameters even without trained adapters.

What would settle it

Feed identical white-box control frames into a strong video2video foundation model and measure whether joint-angle error, camera-path deviation, object-placement error, and trials-per-shot remain statistically indistinguishable from the best omni-reference baselines.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • Creators can set quantitative physical parameters (joint angles, camera waypoints, light color temperature) and obtain deterministic matching outputs instead of dozens of random regenerations.
  • Large video foundation models can be reused frozen as pure renderers rather than retrained end-to-end for control.
  • Human-AI filmmaking pipelines can interleave automatic 3D+T pre-visualization with direct director consoles for scene, motion, camera, and lighting.
  • Each modular piece—world representation, agents, adapters—can be upgraded independently as better 3D tools and foundation models appear.
  • Controllability evaluation shifts from prompt fidelity toward precision, decoupling, consistency, and spatio-temporal completeness of physical parameters.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If white-box frames already work without adapters, standardized 3D+T export formats could become a common control language across competing video generators.
  • The same controller-renderer split may apply to other dense media (interactive worlds, multi-shot narratives) where sparse intent must map to high-dimensional output.
  • Long-horizon multi-shot consistency becomes mainly a world-state management problem rather than a diffusion sampling problem.
  • Many commercial video-model failure modes may be diagnosable as incomplete or inconsistent world narratives rather than missing training data alone.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes the World Narrative Model (WNM), a controller–renderer paradigm for video generation that decouples structured 3D+T physical narrative construction from pixel rendering. Collaborative agents convert multimodal inputs into an editable instance-level world representation (scene geometry/layout, asset placement, character/animal skeleton motion and trajectories, camera 6-DoF paths, lighting). This white-box blueprint is rendered as coarse non-photoreal frames and fed to frozen commercial video foundation models (primarily Seedance 2.0 video2video) as control conditions, treating the base model as a “neural shader.” A human–AI platform with director consoles supports automatic pre-visualization and manual refinement. Experiments on ~3k samples report GSB preference over text-only and omni-reference baselines (overall GSB 2.75 and 2.02) and large reductions in generation trials per shot (novices 18.6→5.1; professionals 9.4→3.2), with six qualitative cases and Likert user ratings.

Significance. If the central claim holds—that explicit physical-parameter control via a 3D+T white-box world yields precise, decoupled, deterministic, spatio-temporally complete control superior to current sparse conditioning—the work would be a practically important systems contribution for industrial AIGC video. The problem framing (gacha loop, four controllability dimensions in Fig. 1 / Table I) is well motivated, the modular agent architecture is open and extensible, and the efficiency gains (trial and time reductions in Table III) would matter to professional pipelines. Credit is due for a full end-to-end platform design aligned with filmmaking roles and for evaluating against strong multi-reference baselines rather than text alone. The contribution is primarily systems/engineering rather than a new generative architecture; its impact hinges on whether the white-box channel truly enforces quantitative physical semantics.

major comments (4)
  1. [§IV.A, §IV.E, Tables II–III] §IV.A (Baseline Control Methods) and §IV.E: The load-bearing claim that coarse non-photoreal white-box frames realize quantitative physical parameters (joint angles, exact 6-DoF paths, independent lighting) rather than approximate layout/style transfer is not measured. The paper explicitly uses frozen Seedance 2.0 video2video with no adapters, then attributes GSB gains and trial reductions (Tables II–III) to “physical-parameter-level control.” Without parameter-level error metrics (e.g., mean joint-angle error, camera-path deviation, lighting consistency between white-box specification and rendered output), results remain consistent with ordinary video2video guidance improving coherence. §IV.G and §V defer such metrics and adapter training to future work, leaving the faithfulness axiom untested.
  2. [Table II, §IV.B–C] Table II / §IV.B–C: GSB aggregation is under-specified for a primary quantitative claim. Scores such as 2.75 and 2.02 are reported without stating the numeric mapping from Good/Same/Bad, number of expert judges, majority-vote procedure details, inter-rater agreement (e.g., Fleiss’ κ), or confidence intervals. “Overall GSB score of 2.75 … 73.3%” implies a nonstandard scale; without the mapping and reliability stats, the preference claims cannot be independently interpreted or compared to standard GSB reporting.
  3. [Fig. 1, §I, §IV] Fig. 1 and §I (Consistency dimension) assert that identical parameters yield identical, drift-free outputs (determinism as a prerequisite for professional pipelines). Foundation models remain stochastic samplers; white-box conditioning may reduce variance but does not by itself guarantee identical multi-seed outputs. The experiments do not report multi-seed identity tests, variance of layout/motion under fixed white-box inputs, or long-horizon drift metrics beyond qualitative claims. This weakens the determinism half of the four-dimensional controllability thesis.
  4. [§IV.A, §IV.G, §V.A] §IV.A and §V.A: No ablation isolates the contribution of each agent module (scene layout, asset placement, motion/trajectory, camera/lighting) or compares white-box video2video against trained adapters (ControlNet/LoRA) that map structured parameters into the foundation model’s latent space. The paper’s own future plan (§IV.G) acknowledges this gap. Without module ablations and at least one adapter baseline, it is hard to attribute gains to the world-narrative representation itself versus stronger multi-frame conditioning or human-in-the-loop editing effort.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§III.F] §III.F: “as shown in Figure??” — broken figure reference for director control panels; Fig. 8 is later referenced but the placeholder remains.
  2. [Fig. 1] Fig. 1 caption lists “decoupling, consistency and spatial-temporal completeness” while the body text and abstract emphasize four dimensions including Precision; align caption and body.
  3. [Table I] Table I uses △ for partial support without a clear operational definition of “partially or implicitly supported,” which makes the comparison harder to audit.
  4. [Throughout] Several typos and style issues: “iilustrated” (§I), “End2End” heading, “W N M” spacing in §IV.D, “Trials pre Shot” in Table III, mixed en-dashes and hyphens in 6-DoF notation.
  5. [§II] Related-work positioning vs. embodied world models (JEPA, Cosmos, WorldGen) is useful but could more clearly cite concurrent media-oriented 4D/controllable video systems and storyboard tools beyond the commercial list in Table I.
  6. [§IV.F, Table III] User-study sample size (number of participants, studios, tasks) is not stated in §IV.F / Table III; only planned large-scale follow-up is described in §IV.G. Report n and task count for the current study.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Engineering systems paper with external human GSB/trial evaluation; no derivation-by-construction circularity in the central controllability claims.

full rationale

This is a systems/architecture paper, not a fitted-constant or uniqueness-theorem derivation. The load-bearing claims (superior scene/motion/camera controllability; reduced gacha trials) are supported by external pairwise GSB judgments and recorded attempt/time metrics against text-only and omni-reference baselines (§IV.B–F, Tables II–III), not by redefining the target quantity as the method’s input. White-box frames are an intentional control channel, not a tautological re-labeling of the evaluation metric: judges score final rendered videos against creator intent, not identity with the white-box. Agent closed loops (scene supervisor, VLM trajectory re-prompt) are iterative generation procedures, not claims that a predicted quantity equals a fitted input by construction. Minor self-use of related 3D generation work (e.g., octree latent model / Trellis lineage) is component-level and not a uniqueness theorem forcing the paradigm claim. Validity concerns about whether coarse video2video guidance truly realizes quantitative joint angles / 6-DoF paths (vs. approximate layout transfer) are correctness/faithfulness risks, not circularity under the stated patterns. Score 1 only for residual mild self-referential substrate (same commercial video2video interface as method and comparison vehicle), which is not load-bearing reduction of the result to its inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 5 axioms · 3 invented entities

The central claim rests on engineering assumptions about agent accuracy, white-box conditioning fidelity, and human preference as the measure of controllability—not on free physical constants. Invented framing entities (World Narrative Model / Representation, neural shader role for foundation models) organize the system but lack independent external validation beyond this paper’s studies. Free parameters are mostly undisclosed thresholds and ranking weights inside retrieval/generation loops rather than global fitted science constants.

free parameters (4)
  • Asset retrieval acceptance threshold (switch to generation branch)
    Highest multi-stage ranking score must exceed an unspecified threshold or fail constraints before generation is used; value not reported.
  • Semantic/visual/geometric retrieval score weights
    Final retrieval score is a weighted combination of three compatibility terms; weights are not given.
  • Agent closed-loop max iterations (layout, placement, trajectory)
    Supervisor–generator loops stop at constraint satisfaction or a maximum iteration limit; limits and stop criteria are not quantified.
  • GSB aggregation mapping (Good/Same/Bad → numeric scores)
    Reported overall scores (e.g., 2.75, 2.02) imply a numeric encoding of GSB labels that is not fully specified, yet drives the main comparative claim.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Full physical semantic controllability is defined by precision, decoupling, consistency, and spatio-temporal completeness as necessary and sufficient industrial criteria.
    Introduced in §I and Fig. 1 as the evaluation target; not derived from external standards.
  • ad hoc to paper Existing video foundation models can act as faithful neural shaders when conditioned by coarse white-box physical proxies without retraining (or with only future light adapters).
    Core of the controller–renderer split (§II, §IV.A); experiments intentionally skip adapter training.
  • domain assumption Off-the-shelf CV/CG tools (depth, segmentation, VGGT, Blender BVH, VLMs) plus LLM script generation yield engineering-valid 3D+T scenes under closed-loop supervision.
    Assumed throughout Modules 1–4; failures are treated as repairable by re-prompting.
  • domain assumption Human GSB preference and trial-count reduction are adequate proxies for quantitative physical control fidelity.
    Primary metrics in §IV.B–F; authors later propose joint-angle/path metrics as future work, acknowledging the gap.
  • domain assumption Media world models may prioritize artistic controllability over strict physical fidelity (unlike embodied world models).
    Explicit design choice in §II Relationship with World Model.
invented entities (3)
  • World Narrative Model / World Narrative Representation no independent evidence
    purpose: Name the explicit instance-level 3D+T+entity blueprint that agents produce and humans edit.
    Central organizing construct of the paper; evidence is internal system demos and user studies, not an external independent measurement of a new physical object.
  • Neural shader role for frozen video foundation models no independent evidence
    purpose: Frame base generators as pixel renderers driven by structural blueprints rather than end-to-end samplers.
    Metaphorical architectural role; success depends on conditioning interfaces of third-party models.
  • Director control panels (scene/asset/motion/camera/lighting consoles) as first-class WNM interfaces no independent evidence
    purpose: Expose quantitative physical parameters for human-in-the-loop refinement aligned with film pipelines.
    Product/system entity; usability claims rest on the paper’s own user study.

reviewed 2026-07-15 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of World Narrative Model for Highly Controllable Video Generation: A Paradigm Shift from Pixel Sampling to Physical World Orchestration." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ABY24G6Y

@misc{pith2026260631946,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: World Narrative Model for Highly Controllable Video Generation: A Paradigm Shift from Pixel Sampling to Physical World Orchestration},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ABY24G6Y}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.31946}
}
Share X LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

The fundamental obstacle to industrial grade video generation is the lack of controllability: existing models treat video as a pixel distribution sampling problem, bypassing the explicit, instance level $4D$ $(3D + T)$ physical world. Consequently, content creators cannot specify geometry, motion, camera parameters, or lighting in a deterministic, quantitative way, leading to the infamous ''gacha'' loop that makes professional content creation prohibitively inefficient and expensive. To address this, we introduce the World Narrative Model (WNM), a paradigm that decouples what to render -- the structured physical narrative -- from how to render -- the pixel generation process. WNM replaces end-to-end black-box sampling with orchestrated $4D$ pre-visualization for media generation. Collaborative agents translate sparse multimodal inputs, including text, reference videos, and sketches, into a fully editable world representation with scene geometry, object layouts, character/animal skeleton motion, trajectories, camera motion, and lighting at quantitative, physically meaningful granularity. This representation acts as a deterministic structural blueprint that drives existing video foundation models, either frozen or lightly adapted, to render final footage, turning the base model into a faithful neural shader. Built on this engine, our human-AI platform supports automatic world generation and pre-visualization aligned with professional filmmaking pipelines, while director consoles enable seamless human refinement. Experiments show that WNM greatly reduces probabilistic ``gacha'' calls and produces videos whose layout, motion, and cinematography closely follow creator intent. The framework is open and modular, allowing each component, such as world representation, control agents, and adapters, to be independently improved. Project website: https://glassroom.sjtu.edu.cn/WNM/.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.31946 by Bingbing Ni, Feifei Li, Jialiang Chen, Jinfan Liu, Laisheng Kou, Liming Tan, Muchun Chen, Qiang Hu, Tielong Wang, Weimin Zhang, Wenjun Zhang, Wuze Zhang, Xianglin Luo, Xiaojie Sheng, Xiongzhen Zhang, Xuanhong Chen, Xu Miao, Ye Chen, Yijing Zhang, Yugang Chen, Yupeng Zhu, Yuxuan Xiong, Zhehan Zhao, Zhewen Wan, Zhifan Zhang, Zhujin Liang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Three key dimensions that indicate the controllability in video generation task, including [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Motivations of the proposed new video generation paradigm: from end-to-end generation towards two-phase task decoupling, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: An systematic overview of our proposed World Narrative Model. The model is based on a series of collaborating agentic workflows including: scene [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Module 1: scene layout generation agentic workflow. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Module 2: asset generation and placement agentic workflow. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Module 3: actor motion and trajectory generation agentic workflow. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Module 4: cinematography and lighting setting agentic workflow. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: A diagram visualization of four director’s control panels, including scene, asset, motion and camera manipulations. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Visualization of six representative video generation results by using WNM as control. The upper rows illustrate the rendered video frames by Seedance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. UniMoCa: Unifying Motion and Camera Controls as Visual Proxies for Faithful Human Video Generation

    cs.CV 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0

    A visual proxy that renders human motion under the driving camera and overlays camera trajectory markers lets a video diffusion model control both body motion and camera movement from a single visual conditioning space.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 12 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Sora: A review on background, technology, limitations, and opportunities of large vision models,

    Y . Liu, K. Zhang, Y . Li, Z. Yan, C. Gao, R. Chen, Z. Yuan, Y . Huang, H. Sun, J. Gao, L. He, and L. Sun, “Sora: A review on background, technology, limitations, and opportunities of large vision models,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.17177, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.17177

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Kling-MotionControl technical report,

    Kling Team, J. Chen, Y . Ding, Z. Fang, K. Gai, K. He, X. He, J. Hua, M. Lao, X. Li, H. Liu, J. Liu, X. Liu, F. Shi, X. Shi, P. Sun, S. Tang, P. Wan, T. Wen, Z. Wu, H. Zhang, R. Zhao, Y . Zhang, and Y . Zhou, “Kling-MotionControl technical report,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.03160, Mar. 2026. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.03160

    arXiv 2026

  3. [3]

    Seedance 1.0: Exploring the boundaries of video generation models,

    Y . Gao, H. Guo, T. Hoang, W. Huang, L. Jiang, F. Kong, H. Li, J. Li, L. Li, X. Li, X. Li, Y . Li, S. Lin, Z. Lin, J. Liu, S. Liu, X. Nie, Z. Qing, Y . Ren, L. Sun, Z. Tian, R. Wang, S. Wang, G. Wei, G. Wu, J. Wu, R. Xia, F. Xiao, X. Xiao, J. Yan, C. Yang, J. Yang, R. Yang, T. Yang, Y . Yang, Z. Ye, X. Zeng, Y . Zeng, H. Zhang, Y . Zhao, X. Zheng, P. Zhu,...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    Seedance 1.5 pro: A native audio-visual joint generation foundation model,

    Team Seedanceet al., “Seedance 1.5 pro: A native audio-visual joint generation foundation model,” 2025, seedance 1.5 pro Technical Report. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.13507

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    Seedance 2.0: Advancing video generation for world complexity,

    ——, “Seedance 2.0: Advancing video generation for world complexity,” Apr. 2026, seedance 2.0 Model Card. [Online]. Available: https: //arxiv.org/abs/2604.14148

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  6. [6]

    Wan: Open and advanced large-scale video generative models,

    Team Wan, A. Wang, B. Ai, B. Wen, C. Mao, C.-W. Xie, D. Chen, F. Yu, H. Zhao, J. Yang, J. Zeng, J. Wang, J. Zhang, J. Zhou, J. Wang, J. Chen, K. Zhu, K. Zhao, K. Yan, L. Huang, M. Feng, N. Zhang, P. Li, P. Wu, R. Chu, R. Feng, S. Zhang, S. Sun, T. Fang, T. Wang, T. Gui, T. Weng, T. Shen, W. Lin, W. Wang, W. Wang, W. Zhou, W. Wang, W. Shen, W. Yu, X. Shi, ...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    TapNow: Your agentic creative canvas,

    TapNow, “TapNow: Your agentic creative canvas,” Official website, 2026, accessed: 2026-06-28. [Online]. Available: https://www.tapnow.ai/

    2026

  8. [8]

    Lovart: The world’s first ai design agent,

    Lovart, “Lovart: The world’s first ai design agent,” Official website, 2026, accessed: 2026-06-28. [Online]. Available: https://www.lovart.ai/

    2026

  9. [9]

    Seko: World-class ai video generation platform,

    SenseTime, “Seko: World-class ai video generation platform,” Official website, 2026, accessed: 2026-06-28. [Online]. Available: https: //seko.sensetime.com/

    2026

  10. [10]

    CapCut: AI-Powered Photo and Video Editor for Everyone,

    CapCut, “CapCut: AI-Powered Photo and Video Editor for Everyone,” https://www.capcut.com/, 2026, accessed: 2026-06-29

    2026

  11. [11]

    Nano AI: Your Personal Super Agent,

    360 Group, “Nano AI: Your Personal Super Agent,” https://www.n.cn/, 2026, accessed: 2026-06-29

    2026

  12. [12]

    LibTV: Professional video creation platform,

    LiblibAI, “LibTV: Professional video creation platform,” Official website, 2026, accessed: 2026-06-28. [Online]. Available: https: //www.liblib.tv/

    2026

  13. [13]

    Attention is all you need,

    A. Vaswani, N. Shazeer, N. Parmar, J. Uszkoreit, L. Jones, A. N. Gomez, Ł. Kaiser, and I. Polosukhin, “Attention is all you need,” inAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 30. Curran Associates, Inc., 2017, pp. 5998–6008. [Online]. Available: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/7181-attention-is-all-you-need

    2017

  14. [14]

    Denoising diffusion probabilistic models,

    J. Ho, A. Jain, and P. Abbeel, “Denoising diffusion probabilistic models,” inAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 33. Curran Associates, Inc., 2020, pp. 6840–6851. [Online]. Available: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2020/hash/ 4c5bcfec8584af0d967f1ab10179ca4b-Abstract.html

    2020

  15. [15]

    Self-supervised learning from images with a joint-embedding predictive architecture,

    M. Assran, Q. Duval, I. Misra, P. Bojanowski, P. Vincent, M. Rab- bat, Y . LeCun, and N. Ballas, “Self-supervised learning from images with a joint-embedding predictive architecture,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Jun. 2023, pp. 15 619–15 629

    2023

  16. [16]

    V-JEPA 2: Self-supervised video models enable understanding, prediction and planning,

    M. Assran, A. Bardes, D. Fan, Q. Garrido, R. Howes, M. Komeili, M. Muckley, A. Rizvi, C. Roberts, K. Sinha, A. Zholus, S. Arnaud, A. Gejji, A. Martin, F. R. Hogan, D. Dugas, P. Bojanowski, V . Khalidov, P. Labatut, F. Massa, M. Szafraniec, K. Krishnakumar, Y . Li, X. Ma, S. Chandar, F. Meier, Y . LeCun, M. Rabbat, and N. Ballas, “V-JEPA 2: Self-supervised...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  17. [17]

    Marble: A multimodal world model,

    World Labs, “Marble: A multimodal world model,” Official product announcement, Nov. 2025, published November 12, 2025; accessed: 2026-06-28. [Online]. Available: https://www.worldlabs.ai/ blog/marble-world-model

    2025

  18. [18]

    WorldGen: From text to traversable and interactive 3D worlds,

    D. Wang, H. Jung, T. Monnier, K. Sohn, C. Zou, X. Xiang, Y .-Y . Yeh, D. Liu, Z. Huang, T. Nguyen-Phuoc, Y . Fan, S. Oprea, Z. Wang, R. Shapovalov, N. Sarafianos, T. Groueix, A. Toisoul, P. Dhar, X. Chu, M. Chen, G. Y . Park, M. Gupta, Y . Azziz, R. Ranjan, and A. Vedaldi, “WorldGen: From text to traversable and interactive 3D worlds,”arXiv preprint arXiv...

    arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    Cosmos world foundation model platform for physical AI,

    NVIDIA, “Cosmos world foundation model platform for physical AI,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.03575, Jan. 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.03575

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    Cosmos 3: Omnimodal world models for physical AI,

    ——, “Cosmos 3: Omnimodal world models for physical AI,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.02800, Jun. 2026. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.02800

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  21. [21]

    INSPATIO-WORLD: A real-time 4D world simulator via spatiotemporal autoregressive modeling,

    InSpatio Team, D. Shen, G. Zhang, H. Liu, H. Ji, H. Bao, H. Zhai, J. Liu, J. Guo, N. Wang, S. Pan, W. Pan, W. Xie, X. Liu, X. Xiang, X. Zhang, X. Chen, Y . Wang, Y . Chen, Z. Fan, Z. Le, Z. Ye, and Z. Zhao, “INSPATIO-WORLD: A real-time 4D world simulator via spatiotemporal autoregressive modeling,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.07209, 2026. [Online]. Available...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  22. [22]

    LoRA: Low-rank adaptation of large language models,

    E. J. Hu, Y . Shen, P. Wallis, Z. Allen-Zhu, Y . Li, S. Wang, L. Wang, and W. Chen, “LoRA: Low-rank adaptation of large language models,” in International Conference on Learning Representations, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=nZeVKeeFYf9

    2022

  23. [23]

    Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models,

    L. Zhang, A. Rao, and M. Agrawala, “Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, October 2023, pp. 3836–3847. [Online]. Available: https://openaccess.thecvf. com/content/ICCV2023/html/Zhang Adding Conditional Control to Text-to-Image Diffusion Models ICCV 2023 paper.html

    2023

  24. [24]

    SAM 3D: 3dfy anything in images,

    SAM 3D Team, X. Chen, F.-J. Chu, P. Gleize, K. J. Liang, A. Sax, H. Tang, W. Wang, M. Guo, T. Hardin, X. Li, A. Lin, J. Liu, Z. Ma, A. Sagar, B. Song, X. Wang, J. Yang, B. Zhang, P. Doll ´ar, G. Gkioxari, M. Feiszli, and J. Malik, “SAM 3D: 3dfy anything in images,” Nov

  25. [25]

    Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.16624

    [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.16624

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  26. [26]

    SAM 3D Body: Robust full-body human mesh recovery,

    X. Yang, D. Kukreja, D. Pinkus, A. Sagar, T. Fan, J. Park, S. Shin, J. Cao, J. Liu, N. Ugrinovic, M. Feiszli, J. Malik, P. Doll ´ar, and K. Kitani, “SAM 3D Body: Robust full-body human mesh recovery,” Feb. 2026. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.15989

    arXiv 2026

  27. [27]

    VGGT: Visual geometry grounded transformer,

    J. Wang, M. Chen, N. Karaev, A. Vedaldi, C. Rupprecht, and D. Novotny, “VGGT: Visual geometry grounded transformer,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Jun. 2025, pp. 5294–5306. [Online]. Available: https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content/CVPR2025/html/Wang VGGT Visual Geometry Grounded Transformer CV...

    2025

  28. [28]

    J. Wang, M. Chen, S. Zhang, N. Karaev, J. Sch ¨onberger, P. Labatut, P. Bojanowski, D. Novotny, A. Vedaldi, and C. Rupprecht, “VGGT-ω,” 18 inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Jun. 2026, pp. 21 486–21 499. [Online]. Available: https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content/CVPR2026/ html/Wang VGGT-ohm CVPR 202...

    2026

  29. [29]

    Depth Anything 3: Recovering the visual space from any views,

    H. Lin, S. Chen, J. Liew, D. Y . Chen, Z. Li, G. Shi, J. Feng, and B. Kang, “Depth Anything 3: Recovering the visual space from any views,” Nov. 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.10647

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Native and compact structured latents for 3D generation,

    J. Xiang, X. Chen, S. Xu, R. Wang, Z. Lv, Y . Deng, H. Zhu, Y . Dong, H. Zhao, N. J. Yuan, and J. Yang, “Native and compact structured latents for 3D generation,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Jun. 2026, pp. 14 419–14 429. [Online]. Available: https://openaccess.thecvf. com/content/CVPR2026/htm...

    2026

  31. [31]

    Autoregressive image generation using residual quantization,

    D. Lee, C. Kim, S. Kim, M. Cho, and W.-S. Han, “Autoregressive image generation using residual quantization,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Jun. 2022, pp. 11 523–11 532

    2022

  32. [32]

    SigLIP 2: Multilingual vision- language encoders with improved semantic understanding, localization, and dense features,

    M. Tschannen, A. Gritsenko, X. Wang, M. F. Naeem, I. Alabdulmohsin, N. Parthasarathy, T. Evans, L. Beyer, Y . Xia, B. Mustafa, O. H ´enaff, J. Harmsen, A. Steiner, and X. Zhai, “SigLIP 2: Multilingual vision- language encoders with improved semantic understanding, localization, and dense features,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.14786, 2025. [Online]. Available...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Introducing Codex,

    OpenAI, “Introducing Codex,” https://openai.com/index/ introducing-codex/, May 2025

    2025

  34. [34]

    GPT-5.5 System Card,

    ——, “GPT-5.5 System Card,” OpenAI, Tech. Rep., Apr. 2026. [Online]. Available: https://openai.com/index/gpt-5-5-system-card/

    2026

This paper was first reviewed by grok-4.5 on July 15, 2026.