Scale Buys Interpolation, Structure Buys a Horizon: Certified Predictability for Equivariant World Models
Hongbo Wang
- Year
- 2026
- Access
- Open access
Abstract
Scale buys interpolation; structure buys a certified horizon. A world model's average error says nothing about whether a particular prediction can be trusted, or for how long. For equivariant latent world models we give a computable, multi-step certificate of the predictable horizon: $T$-step rollout error is provably constant over each symmetry orbit (Theorem A) and stratified channel-by-channel by the predictor's Lyapunov spectrum, $T_j(ε)\sim\log(1/ε)/λ_j$. The horizon is two-sided -- a matching lower bound makes approximate equivariance provably horizon-limited -- and the certificate is exclusive to structure: orbit-constant error characterizes equivariance, so no non-equivariant model has it at any scale. Empirically, on 40-D Lorenz-96 only a $\mathbb{Z}_N$-equivariant network recovers the full Lyapunov spectrum ($R^2{=}0.98$); dense and recurrent baselines fail. Because the spectrum is faithful, the certificate acts, a priori: under a fixed sensing budget a $c\times$-inflated certificate provably needs $c\times$ the budget, and the equivariant certificate meets a budget its inflated dense counterpart cannot -- with zero calibration data. The same read-out, unchanged, audits public pretrained world models training-free: TD-MPC2 checkpoints land on the certificate's own scope taxonomy -- calibrated where strongly expansive (ratio 0.94-1.02), optimistic where weakly expansive, correctly abstaining where contracting -- a map a deployed monitor replicates cell-by-cell, out-of-sample. Across the official 1M-317M multitask ladder, calibration does not improve with parameters. On V-JEPA 2-AC (1B, real robot data) the measured cross-check correctly overrides an over-promising tangent spectrum -- the cross-validated audit, not the raw number, is the deployable object. Scale buys interpolation, not a calibrated horizon.
Keywords
Related papers
The Organization of Behavior
D. O. Hebb
2005
Fractional Brownian Motions, Fractional Noises and Applications
Benoît B. Mandelbrot, John W. Van Ness
1968
Review of deep learning: concepts, CNN architectures, challenges, applications, future directions
Laith Alzubaidi, Jinglan Zhang, Amjad J. Humaidi +7 more
2021
A guide to deep learning in healthcare
Andre Esteva, Alexandre Robicquet, Bharath Ramsundar +7 more
2018