mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Phy-Q as a measure for physical reasoning intelligence

arXiv 2108.13696 ↗First posted 31 Aug 2021cs.AI cs.LGcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Humans are well-versed in reasoning about the behaviors of physical objects and choosing actions accordingly to accomplish tasks, while it remains a major challenge for AI. To facilitate research addressing this problem, we propose a new testbed that requires an agent to reason about physical scenarios and take an action appropriately. Inspired by the physical knowledge acquired in infancy and the capabilities required for robots to operate in real-world environments, we identify 15 essential physical scenarios. We create a wide variety of distinct task templates, and we ensure all the task templates within the same scenario can be solved by using one specific strategic physical rule. By having such a design, we evaluate two distinct levels of generalization, namely the local generalization and the broad generalization. We conduct an extensive evaluation with human players, learning agents with varying input types and architectures, and heuristic agents with different strategies. Inspired by how human IQ is calculated, we define the physical reasoning quotient (Phy-Q score) that reflects the physical reasoning intelligence of an agent using the physical scenarios we considered. Our evaluation shows that 1) all agents are far below human performance, and 2) learning agents, even with good local generalization ability, struggle to learn the underlying physical reasoning rules and fail to generalize broadly. We encourage the development of intelligent agents that can reach the human level Phy-Q score. Website: https://github.com/phy-q/benchmark

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 80 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 Aug 2021.

Builds on

31 of 80 references.

References · 31

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  2. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
  3. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 15,215
  4. 2013Playing Atari with Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 3,274
  5. 2016Asynchronous Methods for Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 2,258
  6. 2020Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 1,969
  7. 2015Deep Reinforcement Learning with Double Q-learningcited by 1,745
  8. 2016OpenAI Gymcited by 1,736
  9. 2015Prioritized Experience Replaycited by 1,099
  10. 2019Adversarial NLI: A New Benchmark for Natural Language Understandingcited by 807
  11. 2015Dueling Network Architectures for Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 785
  12. 2019RLBench: The Robot Learning Benchmark & Learning Environmentcited by 689
19 more
  1. 2019CLEVRER: CoLlision Events for Video REpresentation and Reasoningcited by 484
  2. 2019The Neuro-Symbolic Concept Learner: Interpreting Scenes, Words, and Sentences From Natural Supervisioncited by 372
  3. 2018Deep Learning: A Critical Appraisalcited by 217
  4. 2020The Next Decade in AI: Four Steps Towards Robust Artificial Intelligencecited by 195
  5. 2019A Meta-Transfer Objective for Learning to Disentangle Causal Mechanismscited by 158
  6. 2021Physion: Evaluating Physical Prediction from Vision in Humans and Machinescited by 153
  7. 2019PHYRE: A New Benchmark for Physical Reasoningcited by 137
  8. 2019CATER: A diagnostic dataset for Compositional Actions and TEmporal Reasoningcited by 137
  9. 2020CausalWorld: A Robotic Manipulation Benchmark for Causal Structure and Transfer Learningcited by 109
  10. 2016Playing FPS Games with Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 95
  11. 2017Measuring the tendency of CNNs to Learn Surface Statistical Regularitiescited by 87
  12. 2019CoPhy: Counterfactual Learning of Physical Dynamicscited by 81
  13. 2018IntPhys: A Framework and Benchmark for Visual Intuitive Physics Reasoningcited by 73
  14. 2018Relational Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 73
  15. 2019Rapid trial-and-error learning with simulation supports flexible tool use and physical reasoningcited by 61
  16. 2017When Will AI Exceed Human Performance? Evidence from AI Expertscited by 41
  17. 2020Forward Prediction for Physical Reasoningcited by 18
  18. 2018The 2017 AIBIRDS Competitioncited by 5
  19. 2021Deceptive Level Generation for Angry Birdscited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 4; 2024: 3; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

10 papers.