Reasoning for Mobile User Experience with Multimodal LLMs: Task, Benchmark, and Approach
Authors: Ruichao Mao, Zhou Fang, Teng Guo, Hao Yang, Yaping Li, Shaohua Peng, Maji Huang, Xiaoyu Lin, +4 more
Abstract
User experience (UX) centered on usability, perceived consistency, and functional clarity is fundamental to real-world user interfaces (UI). The application of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) in the field of user interfaces is evolving rapidly, such as visual element grounding, graphical user interface (GUI) agents, and design-to-code generation. However, research efforts on evaluating UX based on UI screenshots are still immature. To address this, we propose UXBench, a novel multimodal benchmark consisting of 2,000 VQA data samples designed to assess MLLMs' ability to perform UI-based reasoning. UXBench includes 8 tasks based on real-world UI screenshots that require fine-grained diagnosis of UX issues across layout relationships, visual hierarchy, and content consistency. Our extensive evaluation of mainstream MLLMs shows that they remain fundamentally limited in their capacity for UI-based reasoning. The results underscore the need for further advancements in this area. To bridge this gap, we propose UI-UX, an MLLM based on Qwen3-VL-4B-Thinking foundation model and enhanced via reinforcement learning with two key innovations: a reward routing mechanism that dynamically balances perceptual understanding and logical reasoning during inference, and an asymmetric transition reward that suppresses redundant or insufficient reasoning steps. Experiments demonstrate that UI-UX achieves state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance on UXBench, attaining an accuracy of 0.7963 -- surpassing Claude-4.5-Sonnet's 0.6550 -- while exhibiting strong generalization across diverse UI tasks and maintaining low inference latency.
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
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as UX judges that inspect interfaces, diagnose usability problems, and propose repairs. Yet no controlled benchmark measures whether the resulting critiques are reliable and actionable across heterogeneous product surfaces. We introduce UXBench, a benchmark for evaluating LLMs as interaction-grounded UX judges. UXBench comprises local-first runnable web fixtures spanning ten product-surface families, paired with coverage-gated browser exploration that forces models to collect interaction evidence before reporting. Each judge model produces a structured UX report over seven rubric dimensions; report quality is measured by whether a fixed downstream repair agent can improve the interface based on the critique. We evaluate eight frontier models under both an automated repair-lift protocol and a blind human validation study. Results show that UX judging is neither saturated nor one dimensional: models differ meaningfully in report actionability, exhibit distinct rubric-level repair signatures, vary in fixture-level reliability, and trade leadership across surface categories
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are increasingly expected to automate visualization development by generating code directly from visual designs. However, existing evaluations mainly focus on single-chart generation and overlook coordinated multi-view interface construction, which requires joint reasoning about data semantics, view coordination, and interaction logic. Consequently, MLLM capabilities in this setting remain underexplored, and the field lacks a dedicated benchmark for systematic assessment. We introduce MV-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating MLLMs on coordinated multi-view interface construction. Instead of relying on incomplete or inconsistent open-source implementations, we use Tableau workbook files as ground truth because they explicitly encode data bindings, visual mappings, and interactions. We develop a multi-stage pipeline that converts these specifications into executable web interfaces through structured intermediate representations. The benchmark contains 92 base interfaces and 1,048 verified instances created by recombining chart types, datasets, and interaction patterns. Each instance includes executable code, a rendered interface, a dataset, and interaction annotations. We evaluate five state-of-the-art MLLMs in a single-pass setting using metrics for visual fidelity, data binding correctness, and interaction completeness. The strongest model achieves 75.45 percent accuracy in visual layout reproduction, but only 21.71 percent in data binding and 11.68 percent in interaction completeness. These results show that current MLLMs can reproduce visual appearance but remain limited in generating the data semantics and interactive logic required by coordinated multi-view interfaces. Iterative refinement improves code executability but does not substantially reduce the gap in data binding and interaction generation.