OpenApps: Simulating Environment Variations to Measure UI Agent Reliability
Karen Ullrich, Jingtong Su, Claudia Shi, Arjun Subramonian, Amir Bar, Ivan Evtimov, Nikolaos Tsilivis, Randall Balestriero, Julia Kempe, Mark Ibrahim
Abstract
Reliability is key to realizing the promise of autonomous UI-agents, multimodal agents that directly interact with the apps humans use, as users must be able to trust an agent to complete a given task. Current evaluations rely on fixed environments---often clones of existing apps--- which are limited in that they can only shed light on whether or how often an agent can complete a task within a specific environment. When deployed however, agents are likely to encounter variations in app design and content that can affect an agent’s ability to complete a task. To address this blind spot of measuring agent reliability across app variations, we develop OpenApps, a light-weight open-source ecosystem with six apps (messenger, calendar, maps, etc.) that are configurable in appearance and content. OpenApps requires just a single CPU to run, enabling easy generation and deployment of thousands of versions of each app. Specifically, we run more than 10,000 independent evaluations to study reliability across seven leading multimodal agents. We find that while standard reliability within a fixed app is relatively stable, reliability can vary drastically when measured across app variations. Task success rates for many agents can fluctuate by more than 50% across app variations. For example, Kimi-VL-3B's average success across all tasks fluctuates from 63% to just 4% across app versions. We also find agent behaviors such as looping or hallucinating actions can differ drastically depending on the environment configuration. These initial findings highlight the importance of measuring reliability along this new dimension of app variations.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Builds on22
- Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward ModelRafael Rafailov, Archit Sharma, Eric Mitchell, Christopher D. Manning et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 10,924 citations
- SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software EngineeringJohn Yang, Carlos E. Jimenez, Alexander Wettig, Kilian Lieret et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 2,059 citations
- WebShop: Towards Scalable Real-World Web Interaction with Grounded Language AgentsShunyu Yao, Howard Chen, John Yang, Karthik NarasimhanNeurIPS 2022 · 1,477 citations
- WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous AgentsShuyan Zhou, Frank F. Xu, Hao Zhu, Xuhui Zhou et al.ICLR 2024 · 1,197 citations
- GAIA: a benchmark for General AI AssistantsGrégoire Mialon, Clémentine Fourrier, Thomas Wolf, Yann LeCun et al.ICLR 2024 · 716 citations
Related papers
- Agent-SAMA: State-Aware Mobile AssistantLinqiang Guo, Wei Liu, Yi Wen Heng, Tse-Hsun (Peter) Chen et al.AAAI 2026 · 2 citations
- AndroidLab: Training and Systematic Benchmarking of Android Autonomous AgentsYifan Xu, Xiao Liu, Xueqiao Sun, Siyi Cheng et al.ACL 2025 · 71 citations
- SMAN-Bench: A Cross-System Benchmark for Mobile Agents under Single- and Multi-path, Ambiguous, and Noisy TasksWeikai Xu, Zhizheng Jiang, Yuxuan Liu, Pengzhi Gao et al.ICLR 2026
- AndroidWorld: A Dynamic Benchmarking Environment for Autonomous AgentsChristopher Rawles, Sarah Clinckemaillie, Yifan Chang, Jonathan Waltz et al.ICLR 2025
- AppAgent: Multimodal Agents as Smartphone UsersChi Zhang, Zhao Yang, Jiaxuan Liu, Yanda Li et al.CHI 2025 · 57 citations
