Mobile-Bench: An Evaluation Benchmark for LLM-based Mobile Agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.00993v1
• Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 06:10:01 GMT
• Title: Mobile-Bench: An Evaluation Benchmark for LLM-based Mobile Agents
• Authors: Shihan Deng, Weikai Xu, Hongda Sun, Wei Liu, Tao Tan, Jianfeng Liu, Ang Li, Jian Luan, Bin Wang, Rui Yan, Shuo Shang,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) have become a research hotspot in human-computer interaction. Mobile-Bench is a novel benchmark for evaluating the capabilities of LLM-based mobile agents.
• Score: 46.81304373693033
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: With the remarkable advancements of large language models (LLMs), LLM-based agents have become a research hotspot in human-computer interaction. However, there is a scarcity of benchmarks available for LLM-based mobile agents. Benchmarking these agents generally faces three main challenges: (1) The inefficiency of UI-only operations imposes limitations to task evaluation. (2) Specific instructions within a singular application lack adequacy for assessing the multi-dimensional reasoning and decision-making capacities of LLM mobile agents. (3) Current evaluation metrics are insufficient to accurately assess the process of sequential actions. To this end, we propose Mobile-Bench, a novel benchmark for evaluating the capabilities of LLM-based mobile agents. First, we expand conventional UI operations by incorporating 103 collected APIs to accelerate the efficiency of task completion. Subsequently, we collect evaluation data by combining real user queries with augmentation from LLMs. To better evaluate different levels of planning capabilities for mobile agents, our data is categorized into three distinct groups: SAST, SAMT, and MAMT, reflecting varying levels of task complexity. Mobile-Bench comprises 832 data entries, with more than 200 tasks specifically designed to evaluate multi-APP collaboration scenarios. Furthermore, we introduce a more accurate evaluation metric, named CheckPoint, to assess whether LLM-based mobile agents reach essential points during their planning and reasoning steps.

Related papers

• IDA-Bench: Evaluating LLMs on Interactive Guided Data Analysis [60.32962597618861]
  IDA-Bench is a novel benchmark evaluating large language models in multi-round interactive scenarios.<n>Agent performance is judged by comparing its final numerical output to the human-derived baseline.<n>Even state-of-the-art coding agents (like Claude-3.7-thinking) succeed on 50% of the tasks, highlighting limitations not evident in single-turn tests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-23T09:37:52Z)
• AGENTIF: Benchmarking Instruction Following of Large Language Models in Agentic Scenarios [51.46347732659174]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated advanced capabilities in real-world agentic applications.<n>AgentIF is the first benchmark for systematically evaluating LLM instruction following ability in agentic scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T17:31:10Z)
• Leveraging LLMs as Meta-Judges: A Multi-Agent Framework for Evaluating LLM Judgments [6.270885758858811]
  Large language models (LLMs) are being widely applied across various fields, but as tasks become more complex, evaluating their responses is increasingly challenging. We propose a three-stage meta-judge selection pipeline: 1) developing a comprehensive rubric with GPT-4 and human experts, 2) using three advanced LLM agents to score judgments, and 3) applying a threshold to filter out low-scoring judgments. Experimental results on the JudgeBench dataset show about 15.55% improvement compared to raw judgments and about 8.37% improvement over the single-agent baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-23T20:32:12Z)
• Multi-Mission Tool Bench: Assessing the Robustness of LLM based Agents through Related and Dynamic Missions [12.218102495632937]
  Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate strong potential as agents for tool invocation due to their advanced comprehension and planning capabilities. We propose the Multi-Mission Tool Bench. In the benchmark, each test case comprises multiple interrelated missions. We also propose a novel method to evaluate the accuracy and efficiency of agent decisions with dynamic decision trees.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-03T14:21:33Z)
• EMMOE: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Embodied Mobile Manipulation in Open Environments [11.97783742296183]
  We introduce Embodied Mobile Manipulation in Open Environments (EMMOE), which requires agents to interpret user instructions and execute long-horizon everyday tasks in continuous space. EMMOE seamlessly integrates high-level and low-level embodied tasks into a unified framework, along with three new metrics for more diverse assessment. Furthermore, we design HomieBot, a sophisticated agent system consists of LLM with Direct Optimization Preference (DPO), light weighted navigation and manipulation models, and multiple error detection mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-11T16:42:36Z)
• Scaling Autonomous Agents via Automatic Reward Modeling And Planning [52.39395405893965]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across a range of tasks. However, they still struggle with problems requiring multi-step decision-making and environmental feedback. We propose a framework that can automatically learn a reward model from the environment without human annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T18:49:25Z)
• ACEBench: Who Wins the Match Point in Tool Usage? [68.54159348899891]
  ACEBench is a comprehensive benchmark for assessing tool usage in Large Language Models (LLMs) It categorizes data into three primary types based on evaluation methodology: Normal, Special, and Agent. It provides a more granular examination of error causes across different data types.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-22T12:59:08Z)
• EmbodiedEval: Evaluate Multimodal LLMs as Embodied Agents [57.4686961979566]
  EmbodiedEval is a comprehensive and interactive evaluation benchmark for MLLMs with embodied tasks. It covers a broad spectrum of existing embodied AI tasks with significantly enhanced diversity. We evaluated the state-of-the-art MLLMs on EmbodiedEval and found that they have a significant shortfall compared to human level on embodied tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-21T03:22:10Z)
• MME-Survey: A Comprehensive Survey on Evaluation of Multimodal LLMs [97.94579295913606]
  Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have garnered increased attention from both industry and academia. In the development process, evaluation is critical since it provides intuitive feedback and guidance on improving models. This work aims to offer researchers an easy grasp of how to effectively evaluate MLLMs according to different needs and to inspire better evaluation methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-22T18:59:54Z)
• BenTo: Benchmark Task Reduction with In-Context Transferability [32.561978389905434]
  This paper investigates how to efficiently reduce the tasks used to benchmark large language models (LLMs) We propose a practically efficient metric for estimating the transferability between two tasks via in-context learning (ICL)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T17:41:15Z)
• Embodied Agent Interface: Benchmarking LLMs for Embodied Decision Making [85.24399869971236]
  We aim to evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) for embodied decision making. Existing evaluations tend to rely solely on a final success rate. We propose a generalized interface (Embodied Agent Interface) that supports the formalization of various types of tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T17:59:00Z)
• RepEval: Effective Text Evaluation with LLM Representation [55.26340302485898]
  RepEval is a metric that leverages the projection of Large Language Models (LLMs) representations for evaluation. Our work underscores the richness of information regarding text quality embedded within LLM representations, offering insights for the development of new metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-30T13:50:55Z)
• Using Large Language Models to Understand Telecom Standards [35.343893798039765]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) may provide faster access to relevant information. We evaluate the capability of state-of-art LLMs to be used as Question Answering (QA) assistants. Results show that LLMs can be used as a credible reference tool on telecom technical documents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-02T09:54:51Z)
• TaskBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Task Automation [82.2932794189585]
  We introduce TaskBench, a framework to evaluate the capability of large language models (LLMs) in task automation. Specifically, task decomposition, tool selection, and parameter prediction are assessed. Our approach combines automated construction with rigorous human verification, ensuring high consistency with human evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-30T18:02:44Z)
• AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agents [88.45506148281379]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are becoming increasingly smart and autonomous, targeting real-world pragmatic missions beyond traditional NLP tasks. We present AgentBench, a benchmark that currently consists of 8 distinct environments to assess LLM-as-Agent's reasoning and decision-making abilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-07T16:08:11Z)
• Do LLMs Understand User Preferences? Evaluating LLMs On User Rating Prediction [15.793007223588672]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional capabilities in generalizing to new tasks in a zero-shot or few-shot manner. We investigate various LLMs in different sizes, ranging from 250M to 540B parameters and evaluate their performance in zero-shot, few-shot, and fine-tuning scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-10T21:43:42Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.