mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Do Coding Agents Need Executable World Models, Simplification, and Verification to Solve ARC-AGI-3?

arXiv 2607.15439 ↗First posted 16 Jul 2026cs.AIcited by 3

On the map: World models → World models for language agents

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Our previous ARC-AGI-3 agent bundled executable world modeling, prompted simplification, and exact replay verification, leaving their individual contributions unclear. An executable world model is a persistent, agent-authored environment hypothesis embodied in runnable code. We compare four Codex-based variants: textual; flexible-interface executable; executable with simplification prompts; and a fixed-interface variant with simplification and exact replay verification against recorded observations. The main study evaluates them with gpt-5.4 and gpt-5.5 at high and xhigh reasoning effort on 25 public games; exploratory follow-ups compare textual and verification with gpt-5.6-sol. In the main study, every variant scores higher as model capability and reasoning effort increase. These gains often exceed variant differences, which are smaller than anticipated and vary across settings. Requiring an executable deliverable is not universally beneficial: textual outperforms flexible-interface executable in both gpt-5.5 conditions. The simplification variant scores higher than its executable-only counterpart in three of four settings; the weakest is the exception. The complete verification treatment ranks first throughout, sometimes narrowly, but uses substantially more resources. With gpt-5.6-sol, the verification variant completes every public level at xhigh and max with about 99% human-relative action efficiency while using fewer than half the human baseline's total actions. At max, however, the textual variant completes every level with 41% fewer actions than the human baseline. Thus, at max, the three imposed mechanisms are not required for action-efficient public-set completion; verification nevertheless scores higher and succeeds at lower effort. Because gpt-5.6-sol postdates the games and held-out performance is untested, results indicate public-set saturation only.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in World models for language agents, one of 11 directions in World models. Builds on 12 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Jul 2026.

Builds on

12 of 34 references.

Closest ancestors · 4

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026OPINE-World: Programmatic World Modeling with Ontology-error-Prioritized Interactive Exploration for ARC-AGI-31 Jul
  2. 2026AGI Maze as a Benchmark Framework for World-Modeling Agents1 Jul
  3. 2024Generating Code World Models with Large Language Models Guided by Monte Carlo Tree Search24 May
  4. 2024WorldCoder, a Model-Based LLM Agent: Building World Models by Writing Code and Interacting with the Environment19 Feb

Other references · 8

  1. 2018World Modelscited by 1,444
  2. 2023LLM+P: Empowering Large Language Models with Optimal Planning Proficiencycited by 496
  3. 2020DreamCoder: Growing generalizable, interpretable knowledge with wake-sleep Bayesian program learningcited by 159
  4. 2023LILO: Learning Interpretable Libraries by Compressing and Documenting Codecited by 46
  5. 2026ARC-AGI-3: A New Challenge for Frontier Agentic Intelligencecited by 29
  6. 2026Workspace Optimization: How to Train Your Agentcited by 7
  7. 2025Graph-Based Exploration for ARC-AGI-3 Interactive Reasoning Taskscited by 6
  8. 2025Refactoring Codebases through Library Designcited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Executable World Models for ARC-AGI-3 in the Era of Coding Agents
  2. 2026Kepler: Auditable World Models for ARC-AGI-3
  3. 2026Mind-Studio: Executable World Models with Lookahead Evaluation for Partially Observable Games
  4. 2026Auto: The AGI Compiler
  5. 2026PatchWorld: Gradient-Free Optimization of Executable World Models for Agent Environments
  6. 2026GameLogicBench: Evaluating Coding Agents on Runtime Game Logic with Tick-Level State Assertions
  7. 2026A2Z GameSpec-Bench: How Faithfully Can Coding Agents Generate Games from Game Design Specifications?
  8. 2026SWE-Game: Can Coding Agents Build the Games We Want?