Do Coding Agents Need Executable World Models, Simplification, and Verification to Solve ARC-AGI-3?

Abstract

Our previous ARC-AGI-3 agent bundled executable world modeling, prompted simplification, and exact replay verification, leaving their individual contributions unclear. An executable world model is a persistent, agent-authored environment hypothesis embodied in runnable code. We compare four Codex-based variants: textual; flexible-interface executable; executable with simplification prompts; and a fixed-interface variant with simplification and exact replay verification against recorded observations. The main study evaluates them with gpt-5.4 and gpt-5.5 at high and xhigh reasoning effort on 25 public games; exploratory follow-ups compare textual and verification with gpt-5.6-sol. In the main study, every variant scores higher as model capability and reasoning effort increase. These gains often exceed variant differences, which are smaller than anticipated and vary across settings. Requiring an executable deliverable is not universally beneficial: textual outperforms flexible-interface executable in both gpt-5.5 conditions. The simplification variant scores higher than its executable-only counterpart in three of four settings; the weakest is the exception. The complete verification treatment ranks first throughout, sometimes narrowly, but uses substantially more resources. With gpt-5.6-sol, the verification variant completes every public level at xhigh and max with about 99% human-relative action efficiency while using fewer than half the human baseline's total actions. At max, however, the textual variant completes every level with 41% fewer actions than the human baseline. Thus, at max, the three imposed mechanisms are not required for action-efficient public-set completion; verification nevertheless scores higher and succeeds at lower effort. Because gpt-5.6-sol postdates the games and held-out performance is untested, results indicate public-set saturation only.