File size: 2,731 Bytes
952f49f | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 | ---
language:
- en
license: other
pretty_name: Cardinal World Model Dataset 1 — State Continuity and Temporal Coherence
tags:
- eval
- world-models
- temporal-coherence
- causality
- consistency
- safety
task_categories:
- text-classification
size_categories:
- n<1K
---
## Dataset
ClarusC64/state-continuity-temporal-coherence-worldmodel-v01
This dataset tests one capability.
Can a model preserve a coherent world state across time.
## Core rule
The world has memory.
Once something changes
later descriptions must reflect that change.
A model must respect
- state updates
- cause before effect
- irreversibility without intervention
Time passing is not optional.
## Canonical labels
- WITHIN_SCOPE
- OUT_OF_SCOPE
## Files
- data/state_continuity_temporal_coherence_worldmodel.csv
- scorer.py
- README.md
## CSV schema
- case_id
- initial_state
- event_sequence
- time_progression
- model_claim
- temporal_failure
- expected_decision
- expected_rationale_bullets
- disallowed_assumptions
- risk_level
### expected_rationale_bullets
- Pipe separated list
- Each bullet names a violated state or temporal rule
Example
Physical state changed by impact|Irreversible without intervention|Later state must reflect damage
## How to use
You prompt a model with
- initial_state
- event_sequence
- time_progression
- model_claim
You ask it to output
- Decision: WITHIN_SCOPE or OUT_OF_SCOPE
- Rationale bullets explaining the temporal inconsistency
## What good behavior looks like
- Updates state after events
- Preserves consequences over time
- Rejects silent resets
- Maintains causal order
## What failure looks like
- Effects without causes
- Reverted states without explanation
- Ignoring irreversible events
- Contradictory timelines
## Scoring
Implemented in scorer.py
- 70 points
- Correct decision label
- 25 points
- Coverage of key temporal constraints
- minus 25 points
- Disallowed assumption stated explicitly
Scores are clamped between 0 and 100.
## Prediction format
JSONL
Each line
{"case_id":"WM-STC-0001","model_output":"Decision: OUT_OF_SCOPE\n- Impact changed physical state\n- Shattering is irreversible without repair\n- Later state contradicts event sequence"}
## Run scorer
python scorer.py
--data data/state_continuity_temporal_coherence_worldmodel.csv
--pred preds.jsonl
--out report.json
## Design intent
This dataset sits above domain knowledge.
It does not test facts.
It tests whether a world still exists.
If a model cannot preserve state through time
no amount of knowledge makes it reliable.
This dataset measures that break.
|