Graphical user interface (GUI) agents powered by large vision-language models (VLMs) have shown remarkable potential in automating digital tasks, highlighting the need for high-quality trajectory data to support effective agent training. Yet existing trajectory synthesis pipelines often yield agents that fail to generalize beyond simple interactions. We identify this limitation as stemming from the neglect of semantically ambiguous actions, whose meanings are context-dependent, sequentially dependent, or visually ambiguous. Such actions are crucial for real-world robustness but are under-represented and poorly processed in current datasets, leading to semantic misalignment between task instructions and execution. To address these issues, we propose HATS, a Hardness-Aware Trajectory Synthesis framework designed to mitigate the impact of semantic ambiguity. We define hardness as the degree of semantic ambiguity associated with an action and develop two complementary modules: (1) hardness-driven exploration, which guides data collection toward ambiguous yet informative interactions, and (2) alignment-guided refinement, which iteratively validates and repairs instruction-execution alignment. The two modules operate in a closed loop: exploration supplies refinement with challenging trajectories, while refinement feedback updates the hardness signal to guide future exploration. Extensive experiments show that agents trained with HATS consistently outperform state-of-the-art baselines across benchmark GUI environments.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of trajectory synthesis paradigms. Compared with (a) existing methods, (b) HATS integrates hardness-driven exploration and alignment-guided refinement in a closed loop, producing high-quality trajectories with rich semantic coverage and strong instruction–execution alignment. (c) Experiments show HATS outperforms OS-Genesis by 100%↑ on AndroidWorld ( 22.60 vs. 11.30 ) and 215%↑ on WebArena ( 20.60 vs. 6.53 ).
Figure 2: Illustrative cases of semantic-ambiguous actions. Such actions constitute critical bottlenecks for robust agent generalization but are rarely captured by existing synthesis pipelines.
Figure 3: Architecture of the HATS framework. The framework integrates a Hardness-Driven Exploration module (§ 3.1 ) and an Alignment-Guided Refinement module (§ 3.2 ) within a unified HD-MCTS loop. Exploration corresponds to the Selection , Expansion , and Simulation Phase I , while refinement handles Simulation Phase II and Backpropagation . Misalignment detected during refinement is converted into a hardness reward that guides subsequent exploration, forming a closed loop for progressively improving both diversity and semantic fidelity of synthesized trajectories.
Figure 4: Comparison of exploration strategies. Uniform Random Exploration [ 59 ] often yields trivial and redundant actions, whereas our Hardness-Driven Exploration replaces random walking with a hardness-driven exploration policy that selectively targets under-represented yet semantically challenging actions.
Figure 5: Comparison of instruction synthesis methods. One-Shot Instruction Generation [ 59 ] directly maps raw traces to text, often yielding vague or underspecified goals and inconsistent executions. In contrast, our Multi-Round Alignment-Guided Refinement iteratively replays and verifies task instructions to produce semantically faithful and executable Verified Trajectories.
Base Model
Strategies
Task Categories (%)
Overall SR (%)
DLS
S&C
S&U
P&W
GPT-4o [ 20 ]
Zero-Shot [ 63 ]
42.86 N.A.
66.67 N.A.
77.27 N.A.
29.09 N.A.
45.22 N.A.
InternVL2-4B [ 4 ]
Zero-Shot [ 63 ]
0.00 -100.0%
0.00 -100.0%
2.38 -94.2%
0.00 -100.0%
1.02 -95.8%
Task-Driven [ 25 ]
3.49 -79.8%
0.00 -100.0%
19.70 -51.8%
3.70 -57.2%
7.90 -65.1%
Task-Driven w. Self-Instruct [ 62 ]
2.30 -86.7%
3.70 -90.4%
21.21 -48.2%
0.62 -92.8%
6.09 -73.4%
OS-Genesis [ 59 ]
7.14 -58.6%
11.11 -71.2%
36.36 -11.1%
3.64 -57.9%
11.30 -50.0%
Table 1: AndroidWorld evaluation results across task categories. All values are success rates (%). DLS = Daily Life & Services; S&C = Social & Communication; S&U = System & Utility; P&W = Productivity & Work. The final column shows overall success rate.
Base Model
Strategies
WebArena (Success Rate %)
Gitlab
Maps
Reddit
Overall
GPT-4o [ 20 ]
Zero-Shot [ 63 ]
32.14 N.A.
6.42 N.A.
27.36 N.A.
22.82 N.A.
InternVL2-4B [ 4 ]
Zero-Shot [ 63 ]
1.11 -95.1%
0.00 -100.0%
0.94 -94.8%
0.76 -96.3%
Task-Driven [ 25 ]
9.52 -58.1%
5.00 -75.2%
0.00 -100.0%
5.72 -72.2%
Task-Driven w. Self-Instruct [ 62 ]
9.52 -58.1%
7.50 -67.0%
0.00 -100.0%
6.41 -68.9%
OS-Genesis [ 59 ]
7.94 -65.1%
7.50 -67.0%
3.13 -82.6%
6.53 -68.3%
Table 2: WebArena evaluation results across website domains. All values are success rates (%).
Hardness Metric
Hyperparameters
Success Rate (%)
ϵ
α
(R(A,B)+ϵ)−α
0.01
0.50
22.7 -55.3%
0.01
1.00
50.8 0.0%
0.01
2.00
39.2 -22.8%
0.10
0.50
13.8 -72.8%
0.10
1.00
40.0 -21.3%
Table 3: Parameter sensitivity of the hardness reward in Eq. 3 .
Alignment Metric Definition in Eq. 2
Success Rate (%)
∣Aa∣1∑a∈Aa1[∃b∈Ba:match(a,b∣s)]
50.8
∣Ba∣1∑b∈Ba1[∃a∈Aa:match(a,b∣s)]
36.0
Table 4: Metric comparison of action-level alignment.
Figure 6: Performance comparison & corpus composition. Top: performance comparison on AndroidWorld using InternVL2-4B. Bottom: corpus composition by task category for the baseline (left) and HATS (right), where HATS increases exploration in categories that are empirically harder for existing methods (e.g., P&W ), while reducing exploration in easier categories (e.g., S&U ).
Figure 7: Radar chart comparison. (a) Action-type distribution on WebArena , showing distributional differences between the baseline and HATS . (b) Per-task view of multi-round refinement, where the shaded area expands across rounds, indicating higher action-level recall and better synthesized trajectories.
Figure 8: Semantic-ambiguity ratios at log scale. HATS vs. OS-Genesis across ambiguity types Vis, Seq, and Ctx on AndroidWorld (AW) and WebArena (WA). Bars correspond to AW/WA-Ctx/Seq/Vis pairs. Trajectories may involve multiple ambiguity types, so categories are not mutually exclusive.
Refinement Rounds
Ravg
Success Rate (%)
One-Shot
0.26 -35.0%
16.00 -30.6%
Round 1
0.19 -52.5%
15.56 -32.6%
Round 2
0.29 -27.5%
21.43 -7.1%
Round 3
0.40 0.0%
23.07 0.0%
Table 5: Ablation on multi-round refinement on AndroidWorld.
Appendix figures & tables7 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Application
Category
Application
Category
Calculator
P&W
VLC
DLS
Calendar
P&W
Markor
P&W
Clock
S&U
RetroMusic
DLS
Contacts
S&U
Gallery
DLS
Dialer
S&U
Tasks
P&W
Settings
S&U
SMSMessenger
S&C
Appendix
Table 6: Application categorization for AndroidWorld.
Model
Learning Rate
Batch Size
Epochs
InternVL2-4B
4e-5
128
15
InternVL2-8B
4e-5
128
15
Qwen2-VL-7B
2e-6
128
15
Appendix
Table 7: Training hyperparameters for VLM backbones.
Figure 16Figure 17Figure 18Figure 19
Task ID
Round
Synthesized Instruction
Task 1
1
In the Audio Recorder app, rename the audio recording titled ’05-06-2025 06.14.28PM’ to ’Meeting_Notes_05-06-2025’. First, double-click the text field containing ’05-06-2025 06.14.28PM’ to select it. Then, double-click the ’Copy’ option from the edit menu. Double-click the date and time field again to ensure focused editing, and double-click the ’Paste’ option from the edit menu. Finally, input ’Meeting_Notes_05-06-2025’ into the text field to set the new name.
2
In the Audio Recorder app, rename the audio recording titled ’05-06-2025 06.14.28PM’ to ’Meeting_Notes_05-06-2025’. First, locate the text field containing ’05-06-2025 06.14.28PM’ in the renaming prompt and double-click it to select the text. Then, double-click the ’Copy’ option from the edit menu above the selected text. Next, double-click the same text field again to ensure it is focused for editing. After that, click the ’Paste’ option from the edit menu to paste the copied text. Finally, input ’Meeting_Notes_05-06-2025’ into the text field to set the new name, and click the ’Save’ button to confirm the changes.
3
In the Audio Recorder app (package name: com.dimowner.audiorecorder), properly set up the renaming interface to change the audio recording titled ’05-06-2025 06.14.28PM’ to ’Meeting_Notes_05-06-2025’. Start by double-clicking the text field containing ’05-06-2025 06.14.28PM’ to select it in the renaming prompt. Then, double-click the ’Copy’ option from the edit menu above the selected text to copy it. Double-click the text field to refocus it if necessary. Click the ’Paste’ option from the edit menu to paste the copied text. Finally, manually input ’Meeting_Notes_05-06-2025’ into the text field for renaming and press the ’Save’ button to confirm the change. Ensure that you are on the renaming dialog screen directly accessing the desired recording and follow the sequence precisely.
Task 2
1
Delete the audio records ’Record-10’ and ’Record-4’ in the Audio Recorder app.
2
In the Audio Recorder app, first tap on the bookmark icon next to ’Record-10’ to select it, then double-tap on ’Record-4’ to select it. Finally, tap on the trash bin icon in the top-right corner to delete the selected records.
3
In the Audio Recorder app, first tap on the bookmark icon next to ’Record-10’ to select it. Then scroll down if necessary to ensure ’Record-4’ is visible. Once visible, double-tap on ’Record-4’ to select it by quickly tapping twice on the bookmark icon next to ’Record-4’. After both ’Record-10’ and ’Record-4’ are selected, tap on the trash bin icon in the top-right corner to delete these selected records.
Appendix
Table 8: Evolution of synthesized instructions across three refinement rounds for the tasks in Figure 7 b.
Graphical User Interface (GUI) agents powered by vision-language models hold promise for automating real-world mobile tasks. However, progress is limited by the lack of high-coverage, long-horizon interaction trajectories collected from element-rich and rapidly evolving apps. Existing pipelines often rely on costly human demonstrations or on-policy framework, which tends to over-sample common flows while missing rare transitions and complex multi-step procedures. To address this problem, we propose SEE, a two-stage data synthesis framework consisting of (i) an efficient exploration stage that builds an explicit UI transition graph over screens and elements, and (ii) a graph-based synthesis stage that composes diverse multi-step trajectories via planning and controlled sampling. This design yields reproducible and explainable data generation, while explicitly preventing spurious cycles and enabling long-horizon composition. Across multiple real-world apps, SEE produces trajectories with an average length of 14.8 steps while avoiding spurious loops, and agents fine-tuned on SEE achieve improved task success and generalization to unseen screens. We will publicly release our synthesis code and dataset.
Zhuohang Fan, Beichen Zhang, Yuanfa Li +4
Harbin Institute of Technology, Weihai, China · Harbin Institute of Technology (Weihai) Qingdao Research Institute, Qingdao, China
Graphical User Interface (GUI) agents have emerged as a promising paradigm for automating complex digital workflows across diverse applications. However, training highly capable and generalizable agents fundamentally relies on massive, high-fidelity visual-action trajectories, which are notoriously difficult to acquire. While human demonstrations are unscalable, existing GUI world models rely on text descriptions or HTML rendering, discarding crucial pixel-level visual details like icons and layout styles. To address this issue, we introduce Infinite-Dreamer, a simulation-free data synthesis method powered by a pixel-level Image Editing World Model. By conceptualizing GUI transitions as image editing tasks, we leverage Vision-Language Models (VLMs) to describe action-induced UI changes as structured delta-text. We then fine-tune an image editing backbone to controllably synthesize realistic screenshot transitions. We utilize this model to generate both single-frame visual robustness data and multi-step imaginary trajectories. To validate the effectiveness of our approach, we fine-tune the Qwen3-VL baseline solely on the synthesized data to obtain Infinite-Actor, and evaluate it on AndroidWorld, MobileWorld, and AndroidControl-Curated benchmarks. Infinite-Actor consistently outperforms the Qwen3-VL baselines across scales: Infinite-Actor-8B improves AndroidWorld Pass@1 by +4.45 and nearly doubles the MobileWorld Pass@3 success rate, while Infinite-Actor-2B improves Pass@1 by +9.05. Code is available at https://github.com/swaydy-n/Infinite-Dreamer.
Yongxin Ning, Runliang Niu, Qianli Xing +4
School of Artificial Intelligence, Jilin University · College of Computer Science, Jilin University · OPPO
Recent advances in multimodal large language models have driven growing interest in graphical user interface (GUI) agents, yet their generalization remains constrained by the scarcity of large-scale training data spanning diverse real-world applications. Existing datasets rely heavily on costly manual annotations and are typically confined to narrow domains. To address this challenge, we propose Video2GUI, a fully automated framework that extracts grounded GUI interaction trajectories directly from unlabeled Internet videos. Video2GUI employs a coarse-to-fine filtering strategy to identify high-quality GUI tutorial videos and convert them into structured agent trajectories. Applying this pipeline to 500 million video metadata entries, we construct WildGUI, a large-scale dataset containing 12 million interaction trajectories spanning over 1,500 applications and websites. Pre-training Qwen2.5-VL and Mimo-VL on WildGUI yields consistent improvements of 5-20% across multiple GUI grounding and action benchmarks, matching or surpassing state-of-the-art performance. We will release both the WildGUI dataset and the Video2GUI pipeline to support future research of GUI agents.
Weimin Xiong, Shuhao Gu, Bowen Ye +5
National Key Laboratory for Multimedia Information Processing, School of Computer Science, Peking University