Good Papers

World Editing: Intervening on Executable Worlds at Increasing Depth

World editing intervenes on executable environments at increasing depth via IGMWorld and IGMBench, where top agents achieve 78.2% task success with reliability declining by depth.

Max Ku, Nok-Kan Law, Yu-Chien Tang, Shih-Ying Yeh, Ping Nie, Andy Zheng, Tat Hei Lai, Fei-Yueh Chen, Nikko Yu, Wei-Chieh Sun, Suzy Huang, Chiao-Wei Hsu, Chih-Chuan Huang, Chak-Wing Mak, Ho Yin Sam Ng, Edisy Kin Wai Chan, Min-Hung Chen, Ho Kei Cheng

Published Oct 1, 2026▲ 14 on Hugging FaceCodearXiv ↗

83%
OverallMust read
?
OverallMust readVote to see the scoreThe exact score shows once you've voted, so every vote is your own call. The first half of each home page shelf shows its scores.
Readers
–

Only vote on papers you've read. Sign in with GitHub to vote.

AI panel13/20reviewers recommend it
lenient 5/5
medium 5/10
strict 3/5
AI panel?Vote to see what the 20 AI reviewers said
Panel consensus
World editing via intervention depth is a sharp framework and IGMWorld is a rigorous executable benchmark, yet the 78% peak masks collapsing reliability at deeper couplings, sub-50% visual consistency, and missing cross-engine and human baselines that…

Abstract

Interactive world models are increasingly capable of generating environments and acting within them, yet deliberately editing an existing executable world remains underexplored. We formulate world editing as intervening on an existing world while preserving properties that should remain unchanged, and introduce intervention depth as an axis describing how strongly an edit couples world entities, dynamics, and systems. We instantiate this capability through industry-grade game modding and introduce IGMWorld, together with IGMBench, a benchmark of 110 tasks and over 1.1K executable state and behavioral criteria across Minecraft and Terraria. The tasks span property, entity, dynamics, and system interventions and are evaluated through deterministic executability, behavioral, preservation, and visual checks. Frontier coding agents already exhibit substantial world-editing capability: the strongest configuration solves 78.2% of tasks under a strict task-level criterion, while criterion-level performance reaches 94.8%. Reliability generally decreases with intervention depth, and this pattern persists even among tasks with similar numbers of evaluation criteria. Most failed edits still build and load successfully, suggesting that the main difficulty is making the edited world behave as requested. Visual consistency remains a separate weakness, with all evaluated configurations below 50% joint visual pass rate. These results show that world editing is a distinct capability from world generation and interaction, and that executable games provide a practical testbed for studying it.