Evaluating web usability typically requires time-consuming user studies and expert reviews, which often limits iteration speed during product development, especially for small teams and agile workflows. We present Avenir-UX, a user-experience evaluation agent that simulates user behavior on websites and produces standardized usability. Unlike traditional tools that rely on DOM parsing, Avenir-UX grounds actions and observations, enabling it to interact with real web pages end-to-end while maintaining a coherent trace of the user journey. Building on Avenir-Web, our system pairs this robust interaction with simulated user behavior profiles and a structured evaluation protocol that integrates the System Usability Scale (SUS), step-wise Single Ease Questions (SEQ), and concurrent Think Aloud. Subsequently, a comprehensive User Experience (UX) report will be generated. We discuss the architecture of Avenir-UX and illustrate how its multimodal grounding improves robustness for web-based interaction and UX evaluation scenarios, paving the way for a new era of continuous, scalable, and data-driven usability testing that empowers every developer to build web interfaces that are usable. Code is available at: https://github.com/Onflow-AI/Avenir-UX
Figures & tables
Figure 1. From deployment to insights: Avenir-UX’s web agents autonomously test your application and generate comprehensive UX reports with SEQ and SUS scores.
Active Think-Aloud Real-time verbalization of reasoning.
Table 1. Comparison of UXAgent and Avenir-UX
Statement
1
2
3
4
5
1
I think that I would like to use this system frequently.
◯
◯
◯
◯
◯
2
I found the system unnecessarily complex.
◯
◯
◯
◯
◯
3
I thought the system was easy to use.
◯
◯
◯
◯
◯
4
I think that I would need the support of a technical person to be able to use this system.
◯
◯
◯
◯
◯
5
I found the various functions in this system were well integrated.
◯
◯
◯
◯
◯
6
I thought there was too much inconsistency in this system.
◯
◯
◯
◯
◯
Table 2. The System Usability Scale ( Brooke, 1996 )
Score
Grade
%
Score
Grade
%
> 84.1
A+
96–100
71.1–72.5
C+
60–64
80.8–84.0
A
90–95
65.0–71.0
C
41–59
78.9–80.7
A-
85–89
62.7–64.9
C-
35–40
77.2–78.8
B+
80–84
51.7–62.6
D
15–34
74.1–77.1
B
70–79
< 51.7
F
0–14
72.6–74.0
B-
65–69
Table 3. Sauro-Lewis Curved Grading Scale (CGS)
Statement
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1
Overall, how difficult or easy was this task?
◯
◯
◯
◯
◯
◯
◯
1: Very Difficult, 7: Very Easy
Table 4. The Single Ease Question (SEQ) ( Sauro and Dumas, 2009 )
Figure 2. Avenir-UX system architecture built on the Avenir-Web framework.
Figure 3. Recreation.gov task execution workflow showing bimodal performance across five stages. Green boxes indicate successful interactions (SEQ ≥ 6.5), yellow boxes indicate friction points (SEQ ≤ 3.3), resulting in a SUS score of 55.0/100.0.
User interface (UI) and user experience (UX) evaluation is central to product development, yet reliable feedback still relies on recruiting human participants or running online A/B tests, making early-stage iteration slow and costly. In light of this, recent work has explored Multimodal Large Language Models as proxy evaluators. However, existing approaches either produce surface-level critiques or a judgment that reflects the model's own biases rather than the genuine response of a particular user. We introduce PerceptUI, a framework for persona-conditioned UI/UX evaluation that predicts how a specific user would answer interface-related questions and produces natural-language rationales. PerceptUI is trained in two stages: (i) contrastive reflection fine-tuning distills teacher-generated rationales by extracting lessons from human decisions, and (ii) a reflective prompt-evolution step from the model's own failure traces. Across multiple domains and datasets, PerceptUI achieves human-level realism, generalizes to unseen questions and personas, and yields population-level response distributions.
Nicolas Bougie, Xiaotong Ye, Gian Maria Marconi +1
Evaluating user experience (UX) on live websites through user testing is expensive, subjective, and difficult to scale. LLM agents offer a promising route to automating UX testing by simulating realistic user behaviour. However, existing simulation approaches typically lack multimodality and require time-consuming manual review to extract actionable insights. We formalise UX improvement recommendation from simulation data as a structured natural language generation and ranking problem, and establish an evaluation protocol using expert annotation and LLM-as-a-Judge. We present AMUSER, a multimodal framework which simulates user behaviour and automatically generates prioritised UX improvement recommendations from resulting data. We evaluate AMUSER on commercial websites and show that its recommendations substantially outperform those from text-only simulation (NDCG@3 = 0.758 versus 0.359) at an 89% lower simulation cost. Our results suggest an asymmetric role of multimodality: visual access during simulation improves recommendations through richer traces, while providing visual inputs during recommendation generation can modestly degrade quality. We also discuss practical deployment lessons from applying AMUSER to commercial websites.
Anu Chowdhury, Bin Wu, Hossein A. Rahmani +1
Centre for Artificial Intelligence, University College London
Evaluating WebUI code generation at scale is difficult: outputs may compile and look plausible yet fail under user interaction, and prior benchmarks largely rely on free-form prompts with static checks (build success, screenshots) that miss functional correctness. We introduce WebUIProof, an execution-oriented benchmark that provides structured specifications and dense, executable interaction tests for WebUI generation across two task families: general WebUIs (e.g., dashboards, game, interactive tools) and 3D interactive simulation (e.g., particle/galaxy systems, physics dynamics). WebUIProof includes a UI-agent harness that runs executable interaction tests in a headless browser using an iterative plan--act--observe loop: it locates DOM elements, performs actions, observes resulting UI/DOM changes, and checks the specified assertions. We evaluate across eight commercial LLMs and observe frequent failures on interaction-based requirements even when pages render successfully, especially on 3D simulation interfaces. Finally, we show the UI-agent harness can provide outcome-level training signals. Training compact models (e.g., Qwen2.5 14B and MIMO 7B) with RL rewards derived from executable interaction tests improves functional completion while reducing build failures.