A Lightweight Vision-Language Fusion Framework for Predicting App Ratings from User Interfaces and Metadata
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
App ratings are among the most significant indicators of the quality, usability, and overall user satisfaction of mobile applications. However, existing app rating prediction models are largely limited to textual data or user interface (UI) features, overlooking the importance of jointly leveraging UI and semantic information. To address these limitations, this study proposes a lightweight vision--language framework that integrates both mobile UI and semantic information for app rating prediction. The framework combines MobileNetV3 to extract visual features from UI layouts and DistilBERT to extract textual features. These multimodal features are fused through a gated fusion module with Swish activations, followed by a multilayer perceptron (MLP) regression head. The proposed model is evaluated using mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), mean squared error (MSE), coefficient of determination (R2), and Pearson correlation. After training for 20 epochs, the model achieves an MAE of 0.1060, an RMSE of 0.1433, an MSE of 0.0205, an R2 of 0.8529, and a Pearson correlation of 0.9251. Extensive ablation studies further demonstrate the effectiveness of different combinations of visual and textual encoders. Overall, the proposed lightweight framework provides valuable insights for developers and end users, supports sustainable app development, and enables efficient deployment on edge devices.
Results and benchmarks
App ratings are among the most significant indicators of the quality, usability, and overall user satisfaction of mobile applications.
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Language modeling | Without image pretrained | MSE | 0.0779 | paper-derived |
| Language modeling | Without text pretrained | MSE | 0.0752 | paper-derived |
| Language modeling | No activation function after fusion | MSE | 0.0870 | paper-derived |
Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure below.
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 95/100, grounding 68/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Datasets
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
Computer vision, Language modeling
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Computer vision
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.