Long-horizon GUI agents are a key step toward real-world deployment, yet effective interaction memory under prevailing paradigms remains under-explored. Replaying full interaction sequences is redundant and amplifies noise, while summaries often erase dependency-critical information and traceability. We present AndroTMem, a diagnostic framework for anchored memory in long-horizon Android GUI agents. Its core benchmark, AndroTMem-Bench, comprises 1,069 tasks with 34,473 interaction steps (avg. 32.1 per task, max. 65). We evaluate agents with TCR (Task Complete Rate), focusing on tasks whose completion requires carrying forward critical intermediate state; AndroTMem-Bench is designed to enforce strong step-to-step causal dependencies, making sparse yet essential intermediate states decisive for downstream actions and centering interaction memory in evaluation. Across open- and closed-source GUI agents, we observe a consistent pattern: as interaction sequences grow longer, performance drops are driven mainly by within-task memory failures, not isolated perception errors or local action mistakes. Guided by this diagnosis, we propose Anchored State Memory (ASM), which represents interaction sequences as a compact set of causally linked intermediate-state anchors to enable subgoal-targeted retrieval and attribution-aware decision making. Across multiple settings and 12 evaluated GUI agents, ASM consistently outperforms full-sequence replay and summary-based baselines, improving TCR by 5%-30.16% and AMS by 4.93%-24.66%, indicating that anchored, structured memory effectively mitigates the interaction-memory bottleneck in long-horizon GUI tasks. The code, benchmark, and related resources are publicly available at https://github.com/CVC2233/AndroTMem.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of AndroTMem . AndroTMem comprises: (i) AndroTMem-Bench , a long-horizon Android GUI benchmark constructed with intent-driven, cross-app, causally dependent workflows; (ii) representative task cases where sparse intermediate states determine downstream decisions; (iii) a diagnostic evaluation suite showing that performance drops with horizon length are primarily caused by memory failures; and (iv) Anchored State Memory (ASM) , which stores causally linked intermediate-state anchors for targeted retrieval and improves long-horizon GUI-agent performance.
Dataset
#Traj
#Steps
#App
GT
Low-Level Instr.
History Modeling
Summary
ASM
AMEX Chai et al. [2025]
2,946
12.8
110
✓
✗
✗
✗
AITW Rawles et al. [2023]
30,378
6.5
357
✓
✗
✗
✗
AITZ Zhang et al. [2024b]
2,504
7.5
70
✓
✓
✓
✗
Android Control Li et al. [2024]
15,283
5.5
833
✓
✓
✓
✗
Android World Rawles et al. [2024]
116
–
20
✗
✗
✗
✗
Table 1: Comparison of AndroTMem-Bench with other mobile GUI agent benchmarks. #Traj: number of trajectories (tasks); #Steps: average interaction steps per trajectory; #App: number of applications. GT: availability of ground-truth trajectories; Low-Level Instr.: low-level instructions. History Modeling: supported within-task history representations.
Figure 2: Overview of the AndroTMem-Bench dataset construction pipeline. (1) Collect popular mobile apps and group them by function. (2) Generate long-horizon cross-app task instructions with step-to-step causal dependencies using dependency-aware templates. (3) Execute and annotate tasks on Android devices or emulators, producing quality-checked trajectories and dataset outputs.
Figure 3: Overview statistics of AndroTMem-Bench. The first row reports the top app combinations, step length distribution by task type, and overall trajectory length distribution (with comparison to prior benchmarks). The second row shows app usage frequency, overall action-type proportions, and action diversity per task.
Model
AMS
TCR
Closed-Source
GPT-4o Hurst et al. [2024]
14.24
11.75
GPT-5 Singh et al. [2025]
12.37
11.46
Gemini-2.5-Flash Comanici et al. [2025]
15.62
14.51
Gemini-2.5-Pro Comanici et al. [2025]
32.71
41.11
Gemini-3-Flash
46.14
55.21
Table 2: Overall performance of evaluated GUI agents on AndroTMem-Bench. AMS measures step-level action accuracy, while TCR evaluates task completion based on anchor-defined intermediate states.
Figure 4: Agent performance across different interaction step ranges under three history utilization strategies: (a) Raw History, (b) Coarse Summary, and (c) Anchored State Memory (ASM).
Figure 5: Model performance across different task categories under three history utilization strategies.
Figure 6: History-related failure modes in long-horizon GUI tasks. Raw traces and coarse summaries often lose task-relevant states, leading to errors such as state loss, mis-binding, context drift, and unverified progress, while ASM preserves structured intermediate states for correct decisions.
Appendix figures & tables6 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Category
Applications
Description
Shopping
JD, Taobao, Pinduoduo, Suning
Product browsing, price comparison, order placement, and online payment for consumer goods.
Travel
Ctrip, Didi Chuxing, Fliggy
Trip planning, transportation booking, ride-hailing services, and real-time travel management.
Map
Amap, Baidu Maps, Tencent Maps
Location search, route planning, navigation, and real-time traffic information.
Mail
Gmail, Outlook
Email communication, message management, information exchange, and productivity-oriented correspondence handling.
Cloud Storage
Baidu Netdisk, Google Drive
Cloud-based file storage, synchronization, backup, and cross-device file sharing.
Meeting
DingTalk, Tencent Meeting, WeCom, Zoom
Online meetings, video conferencing, real-time communication, and collaborative work coordination.
Appendix
Table 5: Functional app grouping based on predefined task-oriented categories (Part I).
Task Type
Primary Intent
Example Scenarios
Lookup
Information retrieval/verification
Checking shop hours, searching for news, or finding answers to specific questions.
Compare & Decide
Decision making via comparison
Comparing menus of three restaurants or checking product parameters across different platforms.
Purchase / Order
Transaction completion
Placing food delivery orders, clearing a shopping cart, or purchasing memberships.
Booking
Resource/Time reservation
Booking hotel rooms, reserving train tickets, or scheduling a doctor’s appointment.
Communicate
Coordination with others
Confirming meeting details with a contact or initiating a group discussion.
Share / Recommend
Content distribution
Sending a store link to a friend or sharing news and music playlists to social media.
Appendix
Table 6: Classification of tasks in AndroTMem based on primary user intent.
Action
Argument
Functionality
TAP
[pos1]
click the on-screen position
INPUT_TEXT
[text]
input the text into the currently focused text field using the system keyboard
LONG_PRESS
[pos1]
press the screen for a long time to copy texts or download images
SWIPE
[pos1]
swipe the screen in a given direction (up, down, left, or right) to scroll the page
SWIPE_TWO_POINT
[pos1,pos2]
swipe from position pos1 to position pos2, enabling precise scrolling or drag-and-drop operations
WAIT
–
wait for a specified duration or until the UI state changes
Appendix
Table 7: The argument and functionality of different actions in AndroTMem. ’pos1’ and ’pos2’ denote the position (x,y) .
Type Name
Recommended Values
Description
Key Subgoal Achievement
SUBGOAL
Completion of intermediate tasks, such as successful login, retrieval of search results, or adding an item to the shopping cart
State Transition and Mode Switching
STATE_CHANGE
Changes in the environment or application mode, such as entering the payment interface or opening a permission request page
Causally Dependent Steps
DEPENDENCY
Steps whose execution depends on prior data or states, such as copying text or filling in a form
Exception Handling
EXCEPTION
Actions taken to address interruptions or errors, such as closing pop-up advertisements or retrying a network request
Global Constraint Information
CONTEXT_INFO
Essential contextual information that constrains task execution, such as selecting dates or setting filter conditions
Task Completion Indicator
FINISH
The sign that the instruction has been completed
Appendix
Table 8: Causal state anchors representing key task progress and execution states in GUI agent interactions.
Figure 7: A complete trajectory example from AndroTMem.
Figure 8: A complete trajectory example from AndroTMem.
Recent GUI agents have made substantial progress in visual grounding and action prediction, yet they remain brittle in long-horizon tasks that require maintaining task state across many interface transitions. Existing agents typically rely on raw history replay or text-only memory, which either overwhelms the model with redundant screenshots or discards localized visual evidence needed for future decisions. To address these limitations, we introduce MementoGUI, a plug-in agentic memory framework that equips MLLM-based GUI agents with MementoCore, a learned controller for online memory selection, compression, and retrieval. Rather than treating interaction history as a fixed context, MementoGUI formulates long-horizon GUI control as an online memory-control problem: working memory selectively preserves task-relevant interface events with textual summaries and ROI-level visual evidence, while episodic memory retrieves reusable past trajectories through learned relevance selection. MementoCore modularizes memory control into specialized operators for step processing, memory compression, episodic writing, and episodic selection, enabling plug-in memory augmentation without finetuning the GUI agent backbone. We further develop a scalable data curation pipeline that converts computer-use trajectories into memory-controller training data, introduce MementoGUI-Bench for evaluating long-horizon decision-making in GUI agents, and design MLLM-based metrics for semantic action matching, task progress, and memory consistency. Experiments on GUI-Odyssey, MM-Mind2Web, and MementoGUI-Bench show that MementoGUI consistently improves GUI agents over no-history, history-replay, and text-only memory baselines, with larger MementoCore backbones further strengthening memory-augmented GUI control.
Ziyun Zeng, Hang Hua, Bocheng Zou +3
University of Rochester · MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab · University of Wisconsin-Madison
Mobile GUI agents increasingly face long-horizon tasks that require reading, updating, and reusing task-relevant data across pages and applications. Existing methods treat memory largely as passive storage, where past observations are accumulated and retrieved when needed. Yet retrieving a value does not reveal its current role in the workflow. The agent must still infer from accumulated records whether the value should be used now, has already been used, or must wait for a later dependency. This implicit reconstruction becomes unreliable in long trajectories with repeated values, distractors, and outdated states, causing repeated or missed operations. To address this, we propose Active Task Driving Memory (ATMem), which shifts GUI-agent memory from passive storage to an actively maintained execution state. ATMem maintains task-relevant information as a continually updated execution state that links each value to its role and current status, enabling action selection based on the current workflow state. While supervised fine-tuning enables the agent to construct ATMem, it does not teach when ATMem is beneficial. We therefore introduce STR-GRPO, an online reinforcement learning method that encourages selective use of ATMem based on its contribution to task completion. STR-GRPO contrasts memory-on and memory-off rollouts to estimate when memory use improves execution, while memory-cost-aware reward discourages costly memory usage that does not improve execution. To evaluate whether agents can complete all in-scope work while avoiding out-of-scope actions, we build a challenging mobile benchmark. From a list of near identical entries, agents must act on every entry that satisfies the instruction and reject entries that violate its constraints. We further introduce App-Level Progress and Scope-Aware F1 to measure these two dimensions separately.
Chen Liu, Ling Chen, Hanzhang Zhou +7
University of Technology Sydney · Tongyi Lab, Alibaba Group · Adelaide University
Memory-augmented mobile GUI agents store successful execution trajectories and reuse them in later tasks, but a stored trajectory rarely matches a new task exactly. The new task may use different parameters, share only some of its steps with a stored trajectory, or have no relevant record in memory. Forcing the agent to use irrelevant memory can mislead it, whereas discarding memory that may still be useful deprives it of guidance from past experience. To address this dilemma, we propose DeltaReplay, a step-level memory reuse framework that decides how to use existing memory without modifying it. We observe that the reusable part of a stored record is determined not by the record itself but by its relation to the new task, mainly through two factors: page-level consistency and action-level generality. We therefore store execution trajectories as paths in a transition graph, whose nodes (pages) and edges (actions between pages) capture these two factors. At reuse time, the action on each edge is split into a task-independent operation and task-specific parameters. DeltaReplay then compares each recorded step with the new task and the current screen, and decides whether to follow it, execute it after replacing its parameters, or leave it to the base agent. On AndroidWorld and SPA-Bench, DeltaReplay improves the task success rate over a base agent with the same backbone by up to 10.3 and 25.0 percentage points, respectively. These results indicate that deciding at each step how to use retrieved memory lets agents benefit even from partially matching trajectories.