Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2605.17656

MUIAnno: An Expert-Annotated Dataset and Evaluation Benchmark for Mobile UI Understanding

Abstract

Understanding mobile user interfaces is important for building intelligent systems such as automation tools, accessibility solutions, and UI-aware agents. However, progress in this area is still limited by the lack of high-quality datasets that reflect real-world mobile applications and include reliable annotations. In this work, we introduce MUIAnno, a publicly available expert-annotated dataset for mobile UI understanding, collected from a diverse set of applications across multiple categories available on the iTunes platform. Each app was manually explored to capture representative UI screens, resulting in a collection that reflects a wide range of layouts and design patterns found in practice. To ensure annotation quality, we developed a custom web-based tool that allows UI/UX experts to label interface elements through a simple drag-and-drop process and generate structured annotations in JSON format. MUIAnno includes detailed annotations of common UI components such as buttons, input fields, navigation elements, and other key interface elements. In addition to presenting the dataset, we also provide benchmark experiments for UI element detection along with baseline results, offering a starting point for future research. We believe MUIAnno can support further work in mobile UI understanding and help improve systems that rely on accurate interpretation of interface elements.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Athar Parvez, Muhammad Jawad Mufti, Muqaddas Gull, Omar Hammad. 2026-05-17. MUIAnno: An Expert-Annotated Dataset and Evaluation Benchmark for Mobile UI Understanding. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.17656

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Explanation Navigator: Rectifying Out-of-Scope Human Interpretations of Leaky AI Explanations through Conversational Guidance

As explanations of artificial intelligence systems proliferate, their recipients must grasp not only what they convey but also recognise what they cannot. We conducted an interview study with nine participants to examine how explainees reason when their information needs exceed the scope of available explanations. Participants often unwittingly confabulated explanatory insights when relevant information was missing from the explanations, not recognising the inherent limitations thereof. We characterise such explanations as leaky explanations -- simplifications that strive to hide complexity yet whose correct interpretation hinges on understanding of the concealed details. To address out-of-scope interpretations we propose Explanation Navigator: a conversational interaction framework that detects mismatches between users' information needs and explanations' content, elucidating pertinent yet implicit details and providing complementary explanations for unmet information needs. An online study with 316 participants showed that our approach allowed explainees to recognise and rectify confabulated explanatory insights, guiding them towards developing correct understanding.

cs.HC

Biased AI improves human performance but reduces perceived helpfulness

Artificial intelligence (AI) increasingly shapes how people think, engage, and evaluate information. To minimize risk, most current systems are designed to present as ideologically neutral with standardized output. Yet growing evidence suggests that these principles suppress cognitive engagement, impair human decision-making, and erode societal diversity. Here we test the opposite approach by deliberately injecting bias into AI assistants. In three randomized experiments with 5,000 participants, biased AI improved human performance relative to default and neutral AI in tasks ranging from misinformation evaluation and financial investment to graduate education. These gains carried a subjective cost. Participants systematically undervalued AI they believed to be biased and inflated the helpfulness of AI they believed to be neutral, regardless of the systems' actual behavior. Interacting with two AIs whose biases flanked the participant's own perspective preserved the performance gains while limiting the subjective cost and one-sided influence. Our findings reveal the strategic value of intentional bias in AI design. Rather than performing a single fair, reliable, and authoritative voice, AI that speaks from specific viewpoints triggers cognitive agency and elevates human-AI performance in judgment, decision-making, and problem-solving.

cs.HC

Learning Password Best Practices Through In-Task Instruction

Users often make security- and privacy-relevant decisions without a clear understanding of the rules that govern safe behavior. We introduce pedagogical friction, a design approach that inserts brief, instructional interactions at the moment of action. We evaluate this approach in the context of password creation, a familiar task with clear quality criteria. We conducted a randomized study with 128 participants across four interface conditions that varied the depth and interactivity of guidance. We assessed three outcomes: (1) rule compliance in a subsequent password task without guidance, (2) accuracy on survey questions tied to password rules, and (3) behavior-knowledge alignment, which captures whether participants who correctly followed a rule also recognized it on the survey. Across the guided conditions, participants corrected most rule violations in the follow-up task and showed high behavior-knowledge alignment. Survey results suggested clearer advantages for some rule types, especially symbol related questions. These results position pedagogical friction as a lightweight intervention for security- and privacy-critical interfaces.

cs.HC