Ontology-Grounded World Models for Failure Diagnosis and Closed-Loop Repair in Physical AI Systems
On the map: World models → World models for language agents
Abstract (arXiv)
EV-WM represents candidate quality with feature and event scores, but these scores do not explicitly record an unmet task predicate, a route label for an available correction mechanism, or a post-correction acceptance result. We present Onto-EV-WM, an ontology-grounded diagnosis and verification-gated correction interface layered above EV-WM rather than a replacement world-model architecture. The implemented task-local TBox defines entity types, predicate signatures, and constraints; source-specific grounding maps predicted or simulator-observed states to task ABoxes; and deterministic rules retain each missing predicate and its arguments when assigning a route label. Learned or heuristic proposers remain separate from this symbolic interface; native task predicates determine acceptance, and the bounded protocol determines whether a failed verification is retried. In the aligned PointMaze evaluation, EV-WM and Onto-EV-WM both report 94% success, with mean final-state distances of 0.90573 and 0.61177, respectively; the separately budgeted search reaches 100% success. On LIBERO-Goal, the ontology represents failed task conditions as typed records, retains their predicate arguments, and associates them with the declared source/joint correction route and predicate-gated acceptance; the complete configuration reports 93.8% corrected-window success on seed 0 and 94.05 +- 0.30% across four evaluation-sampling seeds. On the fixed 10,030-task LIBERO-Plus registry, Onto-EV-WM succeeds on 8,526 tasks (85.00%), with suite-level success rates of 65.98% for LIBERO-10, 91.39% for LIBERO-Goal, and 91.38% for both LIBERO-Object and LIBERO-Spatial. These numbers report the performance of the complete ontology-grounded configurations under the tested simulator protocols; an ontology-only causal share is not measured separately, and real-robot recovery is not evaluated.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in World models for language agents, one of 11 directions in World models. Builds on 15 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Aug 2026.
Builds on
15 of 38 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 14
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,276
- 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,442
- 2023Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Modelscited by 3,211
- 2024OpenVLA: An Open-Source Vision-Language-Action Modelcited by 2,887
- 2024π0: A Vision-Language-Action Flow Model for General Robot Controlcited by 2,407
- 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineeringcited by 1,737
- 2023CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquingcited by 783
- 2024Genie: Generative Interactive Environmentscited by 747
- 2024Revisiting Feature Prediction for Learning Visual Representations from Videocited by 531
- 2024RACER: Rich Language-Guided Failure Recovery Policies for Imitation Learningcited by 49
- 2026Geometric Action Model for Robot Policy Learningcited by 11
- 2025A Unified Framework for Real-Time Failure Handling in Robotics Using Vision-Language Models, Reactive Planner and Behavior Treescited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Toward Pre-Deployment Assurance for Enterprise AI Agents: Ontology-Grounded Simulation and Trust Certification
- 2026Doctor-RAG: A Failure-Aware Repair Framework for Agentic Retrieval-Augmented Generation
- 2026POLAR: Ontology-Guided Risk Prevention for Tool-Calling LLM Agents
- 2026ANNEAL: Adapting LLM Agents via Governed Symbolic Patch Learning
- 2026The Semantic Training Gap: Ontology-Grounded Tool Architectures for Industrial AI Agent Systems
- 2026Failure Recovery via Belief Updates and World Modeling for Long-Horizon Agents
- 2026When Tools Fail: Benchmarking Dynamic Replanning and Anomaly Recovery in LLM Agents
- 2026Ontology-Grounded, Reasoner-Verified Benchmarks for Evaluating LLM Reasoning in Scientific AI