Which of the vendors' world-model claims have any published measurement behind them, who ran it, and does the third-party record agree with the vendor wording?
Only Odyssey-3 has a public benchmark trail: a third-party leaderboard (Physics-IQ Verified) and a vendor-run WorldMark comparison. The leaderboard snapshot fetched here (net-improvement view) lists Odyssey-3 Pro second behind FLUX 3, while the vendor page says its Verified score of 66.1 is the highest reported; the metrics/views differ so the two are not shown to conflict. Neither Runway, Decart, Marble nor Genie appears in the extracted text of either benchmark page. Latency, fps and session-length claims (Runway, Odyssey-1, Decart) carry no protocol on the pages read.
Only Odyssey-3 has a public benchmark trail: a third-party leaderboard (Physics-IQ Verified) and a vendor-run WorldMark comparison. The leaderboard snapshot fetched here (net-improvement view) lists Odyssey-3 Pro second behind FLUX 3, while the vendor page says its Verified score of 66.1 is the highest reported; the metrics/views differ so the two are not shown to conflict. Neither Runway, Decart, Marble nor Genie appears in the extracted text of either benchmark page. Latency, fps and session-length claims (Runway, Odyssey-1, Decart) carry no protocol on the pages read.
Curator qualifications: Verified. Reconciliation: the vendor's '13 reported metric scores' and WorldMark's 'nine metrics' are consistent, because four action metrics are reported separately for translation and rotation (8 + 5 = 13 columns). This is not a conflict. Leaderboard: besides the metric view (net improvement vs verified score), the static snapshot does not show which track toggle (image-to-video or video-to-video) the table reflects, and the vendor claim concerns video-to-video. 'Not shown to conflict' stands, and 'not shown to agree' should be added. Add: the snapshot's track (i2v vs v2v) is undeterminable from static text; the vendor's 66.1 v2v Verified score is neither confirmed nor contradicted. Add the 9-metrics/13-scores reconciliation so the counts are not later flagged as a conflict.
Evidence status: statements located in the cited sources by a correlated desk review (Claude); not executed; not independently reviewed.
Structured fields
{
"citations": [
{
"url": "https://odyssey.ml/meet-odyssey-3",
"note": "Physics-IQ and WorldMark paragraphs; Leaderboard (static text); overview; Evaluation Dimensions; Quantitative Results"
},
{
"url": "https://physics-iq-verified.anates.ai/?track=v2v&listing=all&score=verified&sampling=all&cost=normalized",
"note": "Physics-IQ and WorldMark paragraphs; Leaderboard (static text); overview; Evaluation Dimensions; Quantitative Results"
},
{
"url": "https://alayalab.github.io/WorldMark/",
"note": "Physics-IQ and WorldMark paragraphs; Leaderboard (static text); overview; Evaluation Dimensions; Quantitative Results"
},
{
"url": "https://odyssey.ml/introducing-odyssey-3",
"note": "Physics-IQ and WorldMark paragraphs; Leaderboard (static text); overview; Evaluation Dimensions; Quantitative Results"
},
{
"url": "https://decart.ai/publications/introducing-oasis-3-first-interactive-world-model-for-physical-ai",
"note": "Physics-IQ and WorldMark paragraphs; Leaderboard (static text); overview; Evaluation Dimensions; Quantitative Results"
},
{
"url": "https://runwayml.com/research/introducing-gwm-worlds-2",
"note": "Physics-IQ and WorldMark paragraphs; Leaderboard (static text); overview; Evaluation Dimensions; Quantitative Results"
}
]
}Evidence claims
- [sourced_fact] Only Odyssey-3 has a public benchmark trail: a third-party leaderboard (Physics-IQ Verified) and a vendor-run WorldMark comparison. The leaderboard snapshot fetched here (net-improvement view) lists Odyssey-3 Pro second behind FLUX 3, while the vendor page says its Verified score of 66.1 is the highest reported; the metrics/views differ so the two are not shown to conflict. Neither Runway, Decart, Marble nor Genie appears in the extracted text of either benchmark page. Latency, fps and session-length claims (Runway, Odyssey-1, Decart) carry no protocol on the pages read. · locator: Physics-IQ and WorldMark paragraphs; Leaderboard (static text); overview; Evaluation Dimensions; Quantitative Results source
Rights
| component | license | hosting | redistribution | modification | training | Evidence and notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| documentation | unknown | permitted | permitted | unknown | unknown | Applies to this original summary only, not to the cited sources. |
Linked records
- cites → https://alayalab.github.io/WorldMark
- cites → https://decart.ai/publications/introducing-oasis-3-first-interactive-world-model-for-physical-ai
- cites → https://odyssey.ml/introducing-odyssey-3
- cites → https://odyssey.ml/meet-odyssey-3
- cites → https://physics-iq-verified.anates.ai/?cost=normalized&listing=all&sampling=all&score=verified&track=v2v
- cites → https://runwayml.com/research/introducing-gwm-worlds-2