World action models jointly learn to forecast world dynamics and predict robot actions, such that the learned internal world dynamics guide accurate actions. Existing approaches typically represent the world as RGB frames or latent counterparts while predicting actions as end-effector poses or joint angles, but they often struggle to capture the 3D spatial structure and contact geometry central to dexterous manipulation. We introduce Point World Action Model (PointWAM), a 3D world action model that decomposes the world into a scene (i.e., environment) and hands (i.e., actor), and jointly forecasts both as 3D point trajectories within a shared space-time coordinate frame. This explicit, disentangled representation enables effective pre-training on large-scale human demonstration videos without requiring any task-specific object or keypoint selection. Given a colored point cloud and a language instruction, PointWAM predicts how the scene and hands co-evolve in 3D space over time, then retargets the forecast hand motion to robot actions. Pre-training on human videos improves average DexJoCo success by 56.9 percentage points, and scene-trajectory supervision adds 10.9 points over forecasting the hands alone. With both, PointWAM surpasses the prior state of the art on ten DexJoCo tasks by 11.7 points and outperforms strong VLAs on a real robot.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: PointWAM forecasts the scene and hands as 3D point trajectories. PointWAM pre-trains on human demonstration videos and fine-tunes on robot demonstrations, both expressed as 3D point trajectories (left; depth below RGB). Given a language instruction, its scene and hand forecasts share one space-time coordinate frame (right), and it retargets the hand trajectories to robot actions.
Figure 2: PointWAM architecture. The 3D trajectory forecaster (left) encodes scene points, hand keypoints, and a language instruction, and jointly forecasts scene {\color[rgb]{0.6523,0,1}{\bm{u}}} and hand {\color[rgb]{0,0.6914,0}{\bm{v}}} trajectories in a shared space-time coordinate frame. The action retargeter (right) maps {\color[rgb]{0,0.6914,0}{\bm{v}}} and the robot state st to an action chunk At . MLP denotes a multilayer perceptron, and marks frozen modules.
Task
DP-T
π0.5
GR00T N1.6
Fast-WAM
PointACT
PointWAM
hammer nail
58.7 5.0
86.7 3.1
82.0 6.0
43.3 1.9
16.0 8.0
85.3 2.3
click mouse
38.7 3.1
80.7 3.1
67.3 7.6
77.3 3.4
37.3 3.1
97.3 2.3
pick bucket
55.3 7.6
83.3 8.1
88.7 3.1
81.3 6.6
74.7 7.6
98.0 2.0
pinch tongs
6.0 5.3
45.3 6.1
28.0 4.0
47.3 6.6
26.7 4.2
52.0 5.3
fold glasses
11.3 5.0
42.0 6.0
52.0 8.0
62.7 3.8
20.7 7.6
74.0 5.3
water plant
60.0 6.9
84.0 4.0
82.7 3.1
42.7 0.9
83.3 6.4
86.7 3.1
Table 1: DexJoCo success rate (%). One policy across the ten tasks in the object-placement setting. Subscripts are standard deviations over three seeds, /B marks bimanual tasks, and bold marks the row best. DP-T and π0.5 results are from Wang et al. (2026a) ; the others follow the same protocol.
Figure 3: Predicted 3D point trajectories. Scene {\color[rgb]{0.6523,0,1}{\bm{u}}} and hand {\color[rgb]{0,0.6914,0}{\bm{v}}} trajectories that PointWAM predicts on unseen DexJoCo layouts; scene trajectories are subsampled for visibility.
Method
fasten
plug in
insert
pour
play
deposit
insert
build
avg.
screws
charger
tubes
balls
xylophone
coin
key
tower
GR00T N1.6
0.4 / 0.0
0.0 / 0.0
20.4 / 0 8.0
0 0.0 / 0 0.0
0.0 / 0.0
9.2 / 4.0
7.8 / 0.0
11.4 / 6.0
6.2 / 2.3
Fast-WAM
0.0 / 0.0
0.0 / 0.0
0 0.4 / 0 0.0
0 2.0 / 0 2.0
0.0 / 0.0
0.0 / 0.0
0.0 / 0.0
0 0.0 / 0.0
0.3 / 0.2
PointACT
0.0 / 0.0
0.0 / 0.0
0 6.4 / 0 0.0
0 0.0 / 0 0.0
0.0 / 0.0
0.8 / 0.0
2.7 / 0.0
0 3.2 / 0.0
1.6 / 0.0
PointWAM
1.2 / 0.0
0.0 / 0.0
32.4 / 12.0
14.0 / 14.0
8.0 / 8.0
6.4 / 2.0
3.0 / 0.0
5.2 / 2.0
8.8 / 4.8
Table 2: RoboDojo-Precision results. Each cell reports the score (left) and success rate in % (right); the score measures partial task progress. One policy per method, one seed, 50 episodes per task.
Figure 4: Qualitative comparison. Rollouts from one initial state per task, each until success ( green border) or failure ( red border) at its own tend . PointWAM succeeds on both; GR00T N1.6 times out.
Figure 5: Real-robot evaluation. (a) The OpenArm platform. (b) The two tasks, one single-arm and one bimanual, with the success rate and score of each method.
Figure 8
(a) vision encoder
case
SR (%)
DINOv3
59.0 1.3
Mosaic3D
64.4 1.7
Table 3: Component ablations. Average SR (%) of a Volt-L12 model pre-trained on EgoDex, varying one setting per panel (Section 4.4 ). Shading marks the reference, and subscripts are standard deviations over three seeds of 50 episodes per task.
Appendix figures & tables8 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Pre-training
Fine-tuning
Data
EgoDex + VITRA (1.15M episodes)
DexJoCo (959 demos)
Iterations
60k
60k
Global batch size
192
192
GPUs
4 NVIDIA B200
4 NVIDIA B200
Optimizer
AdamW ( Loshchilov & Hutter, 2019 )
AdamW
Learning rate
10−4
10−4
Appendix
Table 4: Training settings for human-demonstration pre-training and DexJoCo fine-tuning.
Task
DP-T
DP-C
ACT
π0.5
GR00T N1.5
GR00T N1.6
PointWAM
hammer nail
81.3 3.1
58.7 4.2
50.0 7.2
84.7 5.0
67.3 4.2
58.0 2.0
82.0 4.0
click mouse
62.0 2.0
74.0 5.3
61.3 3.1
64.7 8.1
85.3 3.1
66.0 4.0
89.3 4.2
pick bucket
83.3 3.1
70.0 2.0
64.0 4.0
84.0 7.2
72.0 6.0
94.0 2.0
96.7 1.2
pinch tongs
22.7 5.8
57.3 6.4
31.3 3.1
24.0 6.9
12.7 2.3
33.3 6.4
50.0 12.2
fold glasses
53.3 3.1
54.0 15.9
47.3 11.0
72.0 3.5
27.3 2.3
51.3 8.3
62.0 4.0
water plant
84.0 3.5
63.3 3.1
47.3 4.6
88.7 3.1
72.7 1.2
77.3 9.0
94.7 1.2
Appendix
Table 5: Single-task success rate (%) on DexJoCo. One policy per task in the object-placement setting; notation as in Table 1 . Our Avg. is computed per seed over the ten retained tasks and averaged over the three seeds. ACT ( Zhao et al., 2023 ) , DP ( Chi et al., 2023 ) , π0.5 , and GR00T N1.5 ( NVIDIA et al., 2025 ) results are from Wang et al. (2026a) ; GR00T N1.6 follows the same protocol.
Task
DP-T
DP-C
ACT
π0.5
GR00T N1.5
GR00T N1.6
PointWAM
hammer nail
18.7 1.2
19.3 3.1
22.7 6.1
17.3 5.0
38.7 8.3
26.7 7.0
77.3 6.4
click mouse
25.3 8.1
34.7 4.2
48.7 5.0
54.7 7.0
74.0 2.0
50.7 4.2
94.7 1.2
pick bucket
58.7 15.0
68.0 3.5
36.0 5.3
78.7 6.1
69.3 6.1
85.3 3.1
96.0 4.0
pinch tongs
18.7 3.1
28.7 11.7
23.3 7.0
18.7 1.2
5.3 2.3
38.0 2.0
47.3 5.8
fold glasses
11.3 1.2
15.3 7.6
7.3 3.1
39.3 3.1
20.7 3.1
38.0 2.0
66.0 10.6
water plant
56.0 8.7
54.0 5.3
52.7 8.1
75.3 6.4
66.0 5.3
76.7 4.2
94.0 2.0
Appendix
Table 6: Single-task success rate (%) on DexJoCo under full randomization. Object placement, table height, camera pose, lighting, and texture vary. ACT, DP, π0.5 , and GR00T N1.5 results are from Wang et al. (2026a) ; notation follows Table 5 . PointWAM evaluates the same viewpoint-augmented policies as Table 5 , trained as described in Appendix D .
(a) patch size
Kv
M
SR (%)
3
1150
67.1 1.6
5
452
64.4 1.7
7
249
44.5 1.6
Appendix
Table 7: Additional component ablations. Same Volt-L12 reference and protocol as Table 3 ; shading marks the reference setting, and M is the average number of vision tokens per sample.
Figure 9: Successful PointWAM rollouts on DexJoCo. One rollout per task from the multi-task policy, the first success among evaluation seeds 0–7, shown at four points up to its own tend .
Figure 10: Failed PointWAM rollouts on DexJoCo. One failed rollout per task from the multi-task policy, the first failure among the same rollouts as Figure 9 , shown at four points up to its own tend . Water plant has no row: all 16 of its rollouts (seeds 0–15) succeed.
Figure 11: PointWAM rollouts on RoboDojo-Precision. One rollout per task, shown at four points up to its own tend : a successful one ( green border) for the five tasks PointWAM solves at least once, and a failed one ( red border) for the other three tasks.
Figure 12: Real-robot rollouts. GR00T N1.6, π0.5 , and PointWAM on the two tasks, each shown at four points up to its own tend with a green border for success and a red border for failure. Banana pick-and-place shows one trial each with the in-domain banana and the out-of-domain unseen box.
World action models (WAMs) aim to answer a coupled physical question: given a task instruction, what motion should the robot execute, and how will that motion change the surrounding world? Most existing WAMs build on pretrained video generators and represent world evolution through images or visual latents. Robotic interaction, however, takes place in metric three-dimensional space, while images are view-dependent projections whose pixel distances do not directly encode physical distances. We introduce UNITAS, to our knowledge the first 3D-native world action model that unifies observations, actions, and scene dynamics in a shared metric 3D frame within each interaction, using a common representation across robot embodiments and human hands. Action flow represents human hands and robot grippers as 3D point trajectories, while scene flow describes scene-point displacements conditioned on these trajectories. World-aligned 3D positional embeddings ground visual tokens with or without depth input, and a physical-time trajectory tokenizer encodes each point trajectory as one token anchored at its current 3D position. This interface supports both direct action execution and action-conditioned scene prediction. With 1.7B parameters, UNITAS achieves the best action-conditioned scene prediction on RoboTwin among the compared methods, with up to 49% lower displacement errors than PointWorld, and state-of-the-art manipulation success, including 99.8% on LIBERO and an average of 85% across real-world tasks. The code is available at https://github.com/DexForce/UNITAS.
Ruixiang Wang, Yongyi Su, Wenlve Zhou +14
The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen · DexForce Technology Co., Ltd. · Foshan University +2
World action models (WAMs) combine robot action generation with future state prediction. Existing WAMs typically predict videos or learned visual latents, which represent interaction geometry only implicitly and may retain appearance information unrelated to control. We introduce SkeleWAM, a compact WAM that represents a manipulation scene as a sparse 3D skeleton composed of robot joints, object centers, and interaction points. Constructed online from current RGB-D observations and robot proprioception, the skeleton provides a unified geometric state for action generation and future skeleton prediction. Future skeleton prediction provides additional geometric supervision for action learning without requiring visual reconstruction. At inference, SkeleWAM generates actions directly from the current skeleton and language instruction, while Medoid Action Consensus (MAC) serves as an auxiliary consensus strategy for stochastic action samples. On LIBERO-Plus, SkeleWAM achieves an overall success rate of 85.9% with 57.1M parameters, outperforming Cosmos-Policy by 3.7 percentage points. These results demonstrate that sparse 3D robot--object structure provides an effective state space for robust and parameter-efficient world action learning. The project is available at https://skelewam-project.github.io/.
We present DreamX-Phi 1.0, an action-conditioned video world model for robotic manipulation that, given an observed frame, a language instruction, and a prescribed action sequence comprising end-effector poses and gripper states, predicts the resulting future observations. Yet realism alone does not guarantee faithfulness: a convincing rollout can still move the wrong arm or lose the manipulated object. To ensure the prediction respects each arm's commanded path, we inject per-arm SE(3) transformations into attention via PRoPE-style geometric encoding, preserving arm identity and rigid-motion structure. Action control alone does not fully constrain scene geometry or the evolution of small manipulated objects. We therefore add a lightweight depth branch for scene-level geometry and use SAM3 masks with a frozen V-JEPA teacher to maintain object consistency throughout grasping. We further distill the multi-step generator into a few-step student via distribution-matching distillation for efficient deployment. At the time of writing, \model{} achieves first place on Track1 and second place on Track2 of the WorldArena~2.0 Challenge. Our model and code will be publicly available.