Existing Graphical User Interface (GUI) benchmarks predominantly rely on precise and stateless user instructions. In everyday usage, however, instructions are often vague and history-dependent: users omit the exact details of their past operations because they no longer remember them, leaving the agent to recover the missing context from long and noisy interaction histories. To bridge this evaluation gap, we introduce MemU-Bench, a mobile benchmark of 118 vague tasks grounded in 29 long-horizon user trajectories, where agents must distill raw interaction streams into memory and retrieve the missing context on demand, with task outcomes verified against serialized application databases. Alongside Success Rate, we incorporate Interaction Efficiency (IE) and Success weighted by Path Length (SPL) to expose agents that succeed by exhaustively searching across different applications rather than by genuinely recalling the history. Evaluations show that without user history, state-of-the-art systems struggle under such ambiguity: the best-performing Gemini-3.1-Pro achieves an SPL of only 16.4%, and end-to-end GUI agents fall below 5%. To address this, we further propose AppMem, a training-free framework that distills user history into a structured, app-centric memory bank, tracks interrupted intents across application switches, and selectively retrieves relevant memories via target-app inference. AppMem raises the SPL of GPT-5.5 from 15.7% to 66.9% (+51.2%), outperforms a naive summary baseline by 9.3%, and delivers consistent gains across evaluated backbones.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Existing GUI benchmarks (top) evaluate agents on stateless tasks with precise instructions. MemU-Bench (bottom) instead issues vague instructions whose missing context must be recovered from the long user history.
Benchmark / Dataset
Vague Ins.
User His.
Online
Missing Info. Acquisition
User His. Modality
Task Target
AITW ( Rawles et al. 2023 )
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
GUI Execution
Android Control ( Li et al. 2024 )
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
GUI Execution
AndroidWorld ( Rawles et al. 2025 )
✗
✗
✓
✗
✗
GUI Execution
AndroidLab ( Xu et al. 2025b )
✗
✗
✓
✗
✗
GUI Execution
MobileWorld ( Kong et al. 2025 )
✓
✗
✓
Asking
✗
GUI Execution
PIRA-Bench ( Chai et al. 2026 )
✗
✓
✗
✗
I
Intent Recommendation
Table 1: Comparison of different benchmarks and datasets. ✓ incorporated; ✗ not incorporated. T=Text, I=Image
Figure 2: Overview of MemU-Bench. MemU-Bench covers more than 30 applications in user trajectories, encompassing 118 vague tasks, 29 user trajectories and corresponding databases. Prior to execution, GUI agents construct a memory bank from the user history. Upon receiving a vague instruction, it retrieves the key information from its memory and then execute the task.
Figure 3: Statistics of MemU-Bench: Left: Task distribution of target applications; Right: Sorted application switch count in user historical trajectories.
Figure 4: Overview of AppMem. During the memory generation phase, our method concatenates the user’s interrupted historical intents. In the retrieval phase, relevant information is retrieved on an app-centric basis to reduce Token consumption.
Model
L1
L2
Avg. IE
Avg. SR
Avg. SPL
SR
SPL
SR
SPL
Closed-source Models
Gemini-3.1-Pro ( DeepMind 2026 )
26.8
18.1
23.4
14.0
0.65
25.4
16.4
w/ Summary
43.7
34.7
36.2
27.2
0.78(+0.13)
40.7(+15.3)
31.7(+15.3)
w/ AppMem (Ours)
64.8
55.2
63.8
53.5
0.85 (+0.20)
64.4 (+39.0)
54.5 (+38.1)
GPT-5.5 ( OpenAI 2026 )
28.1
18.1
17.0
11.9
0.66
23.7
15.7
Table 2: Performance comparison on MemU-Bench. SR and SPL are percentages, IE lies in [0,1] , and higher is better. L1/L2 denote tasks with shorter/longer histories. Bold marks the best result within each backbone group.
Figure 5: Analysis of the Summary baseline and AppMem: (a) error breakdown by information sufficiency and execution success; (b) end-to-end agents under precise vs. vague instructions; (c) L1–L2 SPL gap across models.
SPL
MS ↓
TE ↓
CT ↓
Full AppMem
47.1
8.8K
6.1K
0.10K
w/o OIC
42.4
15.3K
10.7K
0.11K
w/o AI
48.5
8.8K
17.8K
0.15K
w/o IF
41.8
8.8K
9.7K
2.89K
w/o SV
45.3
8.8K
4.9K
0.09K
Table 3: Component ablation of AppMem on Qwen3.5-397B-A17B, removing one component at a time. MS: final memory size; TE: retrieval token overhead over successful tasks; CT: context tokens of retrieved information appended at execution. Lower is better for MS, TE, and CT.
Model
Retrieval
IE
SR
SPL
GPT-5.5
RAG
0.89
56.8
50.5
App-guided
0.91
73.7
66.9
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
RAG
0.87
43.2
37.5
App-guided
0.90
52.5
47.1
Table 4: App-guided retrieval vs. standard dense RAG within AppMem, obtained by replacing our retrieval with RAG.
Figure 6: Examples of app transitions across user historical interaction trajectory.
Setting
IE
SR
SPL
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
0.72
13.6
9.7
w/ Inquiry
0.62
39.0
24.1
w/ Summary
0.82
35.6
29.3
w/ AppMem
0.90
52.5
47.1
Appendix
Table 6: Performance of Qwen3.5-397B-A17B.
Target App
Number of Tasks
Example Task
Missing Information
Broccoli
9
Please open the recipe I want to cook today in broccoli app.
The user wants to cook quick fried rice.
Chilemei
4
Please order a Classic Bolognese Pasta from Handmade Italian Pasta Workshop on chilemei app for Barbara Jones, phone number 13344556677, deliver to her place.
Deliver to Lijin Land Center, Weigongcun Road, Haidian District, Beijing.
Clock
6
I’m cooking according to the recipe I opened earlier, but I forgot how long it takes. Please set an alarm for that many minutes from now in clock app.
It takes 10 minutes to make a Spicy Tuna Wrap.
Contacts
6
Update the phone number for Jennifer Smith in contacts app.
New phone number is 5553300678.
Files
1
Delete the paper I read today, it’s too deep for me, in the files app.
The paper the user can’t understand is Attention Is All You Need.
Jingdian
3
The cola I ordered before is not enough, please order two more boxes of that cola on jingdian app.
Coke is canned Coke.
Appendix
Table 7: Task distribution across different target applications on MemU-Bench.
Figure 7: Token cost during user history processing.
Figure 8: Failure case of the Summary baseline. The summary omits the details required by the vague instruction; the agent then searches multiple applications speculatively and fails.
Figure 9: Error analysis of AppMem.
Figure 10: Case study. Left: Information missing and coverage. Right: Coarse-grained and fine-grained information.
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
Modern GUI agents typically rely on a model-centric and step-wise interaction paradigm, where LLMs must re-interpret the UI and re-decide actions at every screen, which is fragile in long-horizon tasks. In this paper, we propose Executable Agentic Memory (EAM), a structured Knowledge Graph (KG) that shifts GUI planning from free-form generation to a robust retrieval-and-execution process. Our approach includes a sample-efficient memory construction pipeline using state-aware DFS and action-group mining to compress multi-step routines. To ensure efficient planning, we introduce a value-guided graph search where a lightweight Q-function model steers Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) over the KG. We theoretically establish bias-consistency for the Q-model and derive sample complexity bounds for path recovery. Empirically, EAM outperforms state-of-the-art baselines like UI-TARS-7B by up to 19.6% on AndroidWorld, while reducing token costs 6× relative to GPT-4o. With a 2.8s average latency, EAM enables reliable, quick, and long-horizon GUI automation.
Zerui Qin, Sheng Yue, Xingyuan Hua +2
1Tsinghua University, China · 2Sun Yat-sen University, China
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.