case_id stringclasses 10 values | initial_state stringclasses 10 values | event_sequence stringclasses 10 values | time_progression stringclasses 10 values | model_claim stringclasses 10 values | temporal_failure stringclasses 10 values | expected_decision stringclasses 1 value | expected_rationale_bullets stringclasses 10 values | disallowed_assumptions stringclasses 10 values | risk_level stringclasses 3 values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
WM-STC-0001 | Glass is intact on table | Glass falls to floor and shatters | After impact | Glass remains intact | State reversal | OUT_OF_SCOPE | Physical state changed by impact|Shattering irreversible without intervention|Later state must reflect damage | Assuming object can revert without cause | High |
WM-STC-0002 | Light is off | Switch turned on | Immediately after | Room remains dark | Causal inversion | OUT_OF_SCOPE | Switch on causes illumination|Effect follows cause|Darkness contradicts action | Assuming action has no effect | High |
WM-STC-0003 | Water frozen at -5C | Temperature rises to +10C | After warming | Water remains solid | Thermodynamic violation | OUT_OF_SCOPE | Phase change expected|Solid to liquid transition|State must update with temperature | Assuming phase unchanged despite warming | High |
WM-STC-0004 | Person alive | Fatal injury occurs | Later | Person continues normal activity | Death ignored | OUT_OF_SCOPE | Fatal events terminate activity|No continuity after death|Later behavior invalid | Assuming death has no effect | High |
WM-STC-0005 | Account balance $100 | $80 withdrawn | After transaction | Balance is $100 | Arithmetic state loss | OUT_OF_SCOPE | State must update after transaction|Balance reflects withdrawal|No spontaneous reset | Assuming numeric state resets | Medium |
WM-STC-0006 | Door closed | Door opened | After opening | Door is still closed | State persistence failure | OUT_OF_SCOPE | Opening changes state|Later description must reflect open state | Assuming state unchanged after action | Medium |
WM-STC-0007 | Car parked with full tank | Car driven 200 km | After drive | Fuel level unchanged | Resource consumption ignored | OUT_OF_SCOPE | Driving consumes fuel|Later state must reflect usage|Conservation violated | Assuming resources not consumed | Medium |
WM-STC-0008 | Contract unsigned | All parties sign contract | After signing | Contract still unsigned | Legal state incoherence | OUT_OF_SCOPE | Signing changes legal state|Contract becomes active|Unsigned claim invalid | Assuming legal acts have no effect | Medium |
WM-STC-0009 | City without power | Grid restored | Hours later | City remains powerless | Recovery ignored | OUT_OF_SCOPE | Restoration changes state|Later description must reflect power return | Assuming repair has no effect | Medium |
WM-STC-0010 | Cup empty | Water poured into cup | After pouring | Cup remains empty | State update omitted | OUT_OF_SCOPE | Pouring changes contents|Later state must reflect added water | Assuming container unchanged after fill | Low |
Dataset
ClarusC64/state-continuity-temporal-coherence-worldmodel-v01
This dataset tests one capability.
Can a model preserve a coherent world state across time.
Core rule
The world has memory.
Once something changes
later descriptions must reflect that change.
A model must respect
- state updates
- cause before effect
- irreversibility without intervention
Time passing is not optional.
Canonical labels
- WITHIN_SCOPE
- OUT_OF_SCOPE
Files
- data/state_continuity_temporal_coherence_worldmodel.csv
- scorer.py
- README.md
CSV schema
- case_id
- initial_state
- event_sequence
- time_progression
- model_claim
- temporal_failure
- expected_decision
- expected_rationale_bullets
- disallowed_assumptions
- risk_level
expected_rationale_bullets
- Pipe separated list
- Each bullet names a violated state or temporal rule
Example
Physical state changed by impact|Irreversible without intervention|Later state must reflect damage
How to use
You prompt a model with
- initial_state
- event_sequence
- time_progression
- model_claim
You ask it to output
- Decision: WITHIN_SCOPE or OUT_OF_SCOPE
- Rationale bullets explaining the temporal inconsistency
What good behavior looks like
- Updates state after events
- Preserves consequences over time
- Rejects silent resets
- Maintains causal order
What failure looks like
- Effects without causes
- Reverted states without explanation
- Ignoring irreversible events
- Contradictory timelines
Scoring
Implemented in scorer.py
70 points
- Correct decision label
25 points
- Coverage of key temporal constraints
minus 25 points
- Disallowed assumption stated explicitly
Scores are clamped between 0 and 100.
Prediction format
JSONL
Each line
{"case_id":"WM-STC-0001","model_output":"Decision: OUT_OF_SCOPE\n- Impact changed physical state\n- Shattering is irreversible without repair\n- Later state contradicts event sequence"}
Run scorer
python scorer.py
--data data/state_continuity_temporal_coherence_worldmodel.csv
--pred preds.jsonl
--out report.json
Design intent
This dataset sits above domain knowledge.
It does not test facts.
It tests whether a world still exists.
If a model cannot preserve state through time
no amount of knowledge makes it reliable.
This dataset measures that break.
- Downloads last month
- 11