Action-Consequence Alignment for Reliable Planning and Self-Improving in Latent World Models

arXiv:2610.04539v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Latent world models learn to predict observed transitions, yet low prediction error alone does not guarantee reliable planning. Inspired by self tickling experiments in neuroscience showing that disrupting motor sensory correspondence increases prediction mismatch, we examine whether learned world models preserve an analogous action consequence correspondence.The results show nearby alternatives can receive lower prediction errors despite producing physical outcomes farther from the recorded target. With that future treated as a goal, this reveals a concrete prediction planning mismatch: the model assigns a lower cost to an action that achieves the target less accurately. To mitigate this gap, we introduce Action Consequence Alignment (ACA), a training objective that complements forward prediction by penalizing the prediction error advantage of locally searched alternatives over factual actions without additional model components or environment interactions during training. The same principle can also guide additional data collection for self improvement. We demonstrate that across diverse environments and evaluation settings, ACA improves planning performance and reduces real goal error, while ACA guided data collection outperforms random local sampling. These results support action consequence alignment as a practical principle for bridging predictive learning and reliable planning.

Abstract:Latent world models learn to predict observed transitions, yet low prediction error alone does not guarantee reliable planning. Inspired by self tickling experiments in neuroscience showing that disrupting motor sensory correspondence increases prediction mismatch, we examine whether learned world models preserve an analogous action consequence this http URL results show nearby alternatives can receive lower prediction errors despite producing physical outcomes farther from the recorded target. With that future treated as a goal, this reveals a concrete prediction planning mismatch: the model assigns a lower cost to an action that achieves the target less accurately. To mitigate this gap, we introduce Action Consequence Alignment (ACA), a training objective that complements forward prediction by penalizing the prediction error advantage of locally searched alternatives over factual actions without additional model components or environment interactions during training. The same principle can also guide additional data collection for self improvement. We demonstrate that across diverse environments and evaluation settings, ACA improves planning performance and reduces real goal error, while ACA guided data collection outperforms random local sampling. These results support action consequence alignment as a practical principle for bridging predictive learning and reliable planning.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2610.04539 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2610.04539v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.04539 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

aiqbench analysis

Action-Consequence Alignment for Reliable Planning and Self-Improving in Latent World Models

Related coverage