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$80 withdrawn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
- 23