Sampling headroom is not selection gain: a compute-value audit of test-time scaling for video world models
TL;DR
The Compute-Value Audit (CVA) is introduced, a sequential framework that asks whether extra sampling creates opportunity, observable signals provide a reliable state, that state supports a beneficial action, and the resulting gain exceeds the full entry fee of generation and verification.
Abstract
Test-time scaling (TTS) can improve generation only when additional compute produces better candidates and the system can reliably identify them. This distinction is especially important for video world models, where a wider sample pool may contain stronger rollouts without improving the output that is ultimately selected. We introduce the Compute-Value Audit (CVA), a sequential framework that asks whether extra sampling creates opportunity, observable signals provide a reliable state, that state supports a beneficial action, and the resulting gain exceeds the full entry fee of generation and verification. On 192 Physics-IQ scenes, expanding the pool from 4 to 16 candidates increases oracle quality by +9.23 IQ (95% CI [+7.44, +11.14]), but Flow, Cycle, and VideoReward fail to recover this headroom reliably. Across three generators, none of twelve adaptive-depth policies outperforms uniform compute; they recover only 42-69% of the measured entry fee. A matched-60-NFE Predict-and-Perturb intervention on VideoPhy2 is likewise negative across three fresh-seed replicas. These negative results are not universal: anchor-explorer passes all four stages in a sparse PRM800K setting, MMLU-Pro exposes the gap between predictive state and useful action, and a privileged paired future establishes a positive video upper bound. Together, these results show that sampling headroom has deployment value only when it can be converted into a reliable decision whose benefit survives the complete compute charge. Code is available at https://github.com/YuhuaJiang2002/sampling-headroom-is-not-selection-gain.
