stat.MLSep 28, 2026

One-Step Next-Latent Prediction Is Not a World Model

Authors: Shitong Wang, Zhongang Cai, Yuzhou Hong

Abstract

Next-latent prediction fits a map from the current embedding to the next one. LeNEPA carries this objective to time series, replacing the stop-gradient of next-embedding prediction with the isotropy penalty of LeJEPA. A world model is a transition kernel that can be rolled out. The one-step regression identifies a conditional mean, and a mean is a kernel only in special cases. For a linear-Gaussian Markov latent, the mean transition and the innovation covariance are fixed by the one-step problem, and the open-loop squared error at horizon KK equals the trace of the sum of the pushed-forward innovation covariances. That error grows with KK after the one-step fit is exact. If the conditional mean is nonlinear, composing it is not the multi-step conditional mean. If the observation is a non-injective function of a Markov state, a memoryless one-step map does not determine future observations, while a short window can. An isotropy penalty is a function of the embedding marginal, so its partial derivative in the transition weights is zero. On a scalar autoregression with coefficient 0.90.9, the one-step mean squared error is 0.9980.998 and the 1616-step open-loop error is 5.105.10. On a hidden rotation, an eight-step window reaches 1616-step error 0.0560.056, while the current scalar alone reaches 0.7780.778. Raising the isotropy weight from 0.10.1 to 1010 leaves eight-step latent error inside [0.78,0.85][0.78,0.85] on three seeds.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

Jul 11, 2026cs.LG

A Control Theory of Predictability in Latent World Models

Latent world models are trained to predict future states in a learned representation and are then deployed inside a planner that selects actions by simulating them forward. Current practice adopts the prediction error, the single- or multi-step rollout loss on held-out data, as the training and model-selection objective, on the assumption that a lower prediction error yields better control. We show that this assumption is unreliable for a structural reason: a planner does not query the model on the training distribution but on the states that its candidate actions reach, which generally leave the data manifold, so an error averaged over the data cannot by itself govern control. We therefore reframe the objective as the discrepancy between the predicted and the true plan-cost at the plan the planner commits to, and prove that the planner's suboptimality is bounded by twice this discrepancy, whereas the data-averaged prediction error neither bounds nor tracks it. Under a linear-control premise the discrepancy separates into two terms. The first is a small on-manifold residual, on which the predicted and true dynamics agree and which a spectral tax prices through the non-normality of the latent transition operator. The second is an off-manifold divergence, on which an action carries the state off the manifold and the two dynamics diverge; this divergence is the binding term and is bounded by no data-averaged error. Synthetic operators confirm the pricing formulas, and latent model-predictive control experiments confirm the decoupling: across seeds, the single-step validation error is essentially uncorrelated with control success, whereas a fidelity score on the planner-reachable measure tracks it.
May 25, 2026stat.ML

When Does LeJEPA Learn a World Model?

A representation that scrambles the true degrees of freedom of the world cannot support reliable planning or compositional generalization. We prove that LeJEPA (alignment plus Gaussian regularization) linearly recovers the world's latent variables from nonlinear observations, a property known as linear identifiability, in a broad class of worlds where latents evolve under stationary, additive-noise transitions. Our main result is that among all such worlds, the Gaussian is the unique latent distribution for which this guarantee holds. The forward direction rests on a spectral decomposition in which each degree of nonlinearity is strictly penalized by alignment, making the linear map the optimum; the converse rules out every non-Gaussian alternative. We further prove an approximate identifiability result where the guarantee degrades gracefully, and show that linear, orthogonal identifiability enables optimal latent-space planning. We validate the theory with experiments ranging from 2D examples to 1024-dimensional latents, including distributional ablations and pixel-based robotic control. Our theory turns an empirically successful recipe into a mathematical guarantee, providing the foundation for building World Models that provably recover the structure of the world.
Aug 20, 2026cs.LG

Orthogonal JEPA: Factorized Predictive States for Latent World Models

World models construct latent states that support prediction, planning, and reasoning about an underlying system. Joint-embedding predictive architectures (JEPAs) offer a direct way to learn such states by predicting targets in representation space instead of reconstructing every detail of the observation. Standard JEPAs, however, organize all predictable content through one target embedding and one prediction pathway. In complex systems, this monolithic state can allocate redundant capacity to dominant signals while providing weak or conflicting gradients to less dominant predictive structure. We introduce \method, a latent world-modeling framework based on orthogonal predictive factorization. Learned basis matrices analyze each target state into multiple components, and a dedicated prediction branch estimates each component from a shared context representation. Predictive regression preserves the factor magnitudes required for state synthesis, an orthogonality objective discourages repeated directions, factor-activity regularization maintains variation in projected targets, and online variance regularization discourages coordinate-wise encoder collapse. Predicted components are synthesized into a complete latent state that can be used by a readout, decoder, planner, or autoregressive rollout. The same predictive-state mechanism applies when the target is temporally future, spatially hidden, or another partial observation of the same system. Experiments on controlled vision, single-cell transcriptomics, longitudinal health records, continuous control, and molecular dynamics evaluate representation quality, forecasting, planning, and long-horizon stability.