Seeing Through the Illusion: Test-Time Scaling for World Action Models

Test-time scaling improves foundation-model inference by spending additional computation, but robot control requires deciding whether extra compute is useful before executing an action. World Action Models (WAMs) make this decision natural: each rollout exposes both an action chunk and predicted future observations. We propose \methodgated, a training-free selective test-time scaling framework for WAMs. We first instantiate \method, a fixed-budget Best-of-$N$ selector that ranks sampled rollouts by cross-view depth reprojection consistency of their predicted futures, computed with a frozen geometry foundation model. \methodgated\ adds a lightweight action--future consistency gate that invokes \method\ only when the initial rollout appears internally inconsistent. Across five benchmark--backbone settings on RoboCasa, LIBERO Long, and RoboTwin~2.0, fixed-budget \method\ improves $N{=}8$ task success in every setting, e.g., raising the RoboCasa group average from $66.3\%$ to $68.4\%$ with Cosmos Policy and from $80.8\%$ to $82.5\%$ with X-WAM. With gating enabled, \methodgated\ recovers on average $74.8\%$ of the always-on success gain while triggering additional sampling on only $26.2\%$ of decision points. Offline diagnostics show that cross-view reprojection is a strong task-label-free selector, and we identify false low-score selections as a failure mode that helps explain why performance can saturate or degrade as $N$ increases.

World Action Models (WAMs) enable decision-making through imagined rollouts by predicting future observations and actions. However, the reliability of these imagined futures remains under-examined: is a generated future merely visually plausible, or is it dynamically compatible with the action sequence it claims to model? In this work, we identify action-state consistency, the alignment between predicted actions and induced state transitions, as a missing reliability axis for WAMs. Through a systematic study across representative joint-prediction and inverse-dynamics models, we find that action-state consistency systematically separates successful and failed rollouts across many tasks and follows similar success-failure trends as learned value estimates. These results suggest that consistency captures decision-relevant structure beyond visual realism. We further identify background collapse as an important boundary condition, where low-dynamics failed trajectories can become deceptively consistent because static futures are easier to predict. Building on these findings, we introduce a value-free consensus strategy for test-time selection, which ranks candidate rollouts by agreement among predicted futures. This strategy improves success rates on RoboCasa and RoboTwin 2.0 without additional training or reward modeling. Taken together, our findings establish action-state consistency as both a diagnostic tool for evaluating WAM reliability and a practical signal for value-free planning.

World Action Models (WAMs) jointly predict future actions and the evolution of the environment. At each inference, a WAM generates a chunk of actions and the robot executes a fixed prefix before replanning. We argue that this fixed execution horizon is poorly matched to execution dynamics: the chunk reliability varies across task stages, so when to replan depends on the result of accumulated execution, not on the step counts. We propose TempoWAM (Timing Execution by Monitoring Progress Online), a lightweight plug-and-play execution scheme for WAMs. A Recurrent Progress Monitor first estimates task progress from the current observation, task instruction, remaining actions, and execution history; and an Adaptive Execution Protocol then evaluates whether the chunk is advancing the task to decide if replanning is needed. To bridge the training-deployment gap, the protocol is calibrated by a task-dependent calibration factor with online adaptation. Experiments on LIBERO, RoboTwin, and real-world tasks show that TempoWAM consistently improves the efficiency-success trade-off of WAM execution. On real robots, it reduces WAM inferences by 26.9% on easy tasks while maintaining success, and improves success by 13.3 points on difficult tasks.