Skip to content
← Back to explorer

KnowU-Bench: Towards Interactive, Proactive, and Personalized Mobile Agent Evaluation

Tongbo Chen, Zhengxi Lu, Zhan Xu, Guocheng Shao, Shaohan Zhao, Fei Tang, Yong Du, Kaitao Song, Yizhou Liu, Yuchen Yan, Wenqi Zhang, Xu Tan, Weiming Lu, Jun Xiao, Yueting Zhuang, Yongliang Shen · Apr 9, 2026 · Citations: 0

How to use this paper page

Coverage: Recent

Use this page to decide whether the paper is strong enough to influence an eval design. It summarizes the abstract plus available structured metadata. If the signal is thin, use it as background context and compare it against stronger hub pages before making protocol choices.

Best use

Background context only

Metadata: Recent

Trust level

Provisional

Signals: Recent

What still needs checking

Structured extraction is still processing; current fields are metadata-first.

Signal confidence unavailable

Abstract

Personalized mobile agents that infer user preferences and calibrate proactive assistance hold great promise as everyday digital assistants, yet existing benchmarks fail to capture what this requires. Prior work evaluates preference recovery from static histories or intent prediction from fixed contexts. Neither tests whether an agent can elicit missing preferences through interaction, nor whether it can decide when to intervene, seek consent, or remain silent in a live GUI environment. We introduce KnowU-Bench, an online benchmark for personalized mobile agents built on a reproducible Android emulation environment, covering 42 general GUI tasks, 86 personalized tasks, and 64 proactive tasks. Unlike prior work that treats user preferences as static context, KnowU-Bench hides the user profile from the agent and exposes only behavioral logs, forcing genuine preference inference rather than context lookup. To support multi-turn preference elicitation, it instantiates an LLM-driven user simulator grounded in structured profiles, enabling realistic clarification dialogues and proactive consent handling. Beyond personalization, KnowU-Bench provides comprehensive evaluation of the complete proactive decision chain, including grounded GUI execution, consent negotiation, and post-rejection restraint, evaluated through a hybrid protocol combining rule-based verification with LLM-as-a-Judge scoring. Our experiments reveal a striking degradation: agents that excel at explicit task execution fall below 50% under vague instructions requiring user preference inference or intervention calibration, even for frontier models like Claude Sonnet 4.6. The core bottlenecks are not GUI navigation but preference acquisition and intervention calibration, exposing a fundamental gap between competent interface operation and trustworthy personal assistance.

Use caution before copying this protocol

Use this page for context, then validate protocol choices against stronger HFEPX references before implementation decisions.

  • Structured extraction is still processing; current fields are metadata-first.

HFEPX Relevance Assessment

Signal extraction is still processing. This page currently shows metadata-first guidance until structured protocol fields are ready.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A provisional background reference while structured extraction finishes.

Main weakness

Structured extraction is still processing; current fields are metadata-first.

Trust level

Provisional

Eval-Fit Score

Unavailable

Eval-fit score is unavailable until extraction completes.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

HFEPX Fit

Provisional (processing)

Extraction confidence: Provisional

What This Page Found In The Paper

Each field below shows whether the signal looked explicit, partial, or missing in the available metadata. Use this to judge what is safe to trust directly and what still needs full-paper validation.

Human Feedback Types

provisional

Pairwise preference

Confidence: Provisional Best-effort inference

Directly usable for protocol triage.

Evidence snippet: Personalized mobile agents that infer user preferences and calibrate proactive assistance hold great promise as everyday digital assistants, yet existing benchmarks fail to capture what this requires.

Evaluation Modes

provisional

Simulation environment

Confidence: Provisional Best-effort inference

Includes extracted eval setup.

Evidence snippet: Personalized mobile agents that infer user preferences and calibrate proactive assistance hold great promise as everyday digital assistants, yet existing benchmarks fail to capture what this requires.

Quality Controls

provisional

Not reported

Confidence: Provisional Best-effort inference

No explicit QC controls found.

Evidence snippet: Personalized mobile agents that infer user preferences and calibrate proactive assistance hold great promise as everyday digital assistants, yet existing benchmarks fail to capture what this requires.

Benchmarks / Datasets

provisional

Not extracted

Confidence: Provisional Best-effort inference

No benchmark anchors detected.

Evidence snippet: Personalized mobile agents that infer user preferences and calibrate proactive assistance hold great promise as everyday digital assistants, yet existing benchmarks fail to capture what this requires.

Reported Metrics

provisional

Calibration

Confidence: Provisional Best-effort inference

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

Evidence snippet: Our experiments reveal a striking degradation: agents that excel at explicit task execution fall below 50% under vague instructions requiring user preference inference or intervention calibration, even for frontier models like Claude Sonnet 4.6.

Rater Population

provisional

Unknown

Confidence: Provisional Best-effort inference

Rater source not explicitly reported.

Evidence snippet: Personalized mobile agents that infer user preferences and calibrate proactive assistance hold great promise as everyday digital assistants, yet existing benchmarks fail to capture what this requires.

Human Data Lens

This page is using abstract-level cues only right now. Treat the signals below as provisional.

  • Potential human-data signal: Pairwise preference
  • Potential benchmark anchors: No benchmark names detected in abstract.
  • Abstract highlights: 3 key sentence(s) extracted below.

Evaluation Lens

Evaluation fields are inferred from the abstract only.

  • Potential evaluation modes: Simulation environment
  • Potential metric signals: Calibration
  • Confidence: Provisional (metadata-only fallback).

Research Brief

Metadata summary

Personalized mobile agents that infer user preferences and calibrate proactive assistance hold great promise as everyday digital assistants, yet existing benchmarks fail to capture what this requires.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • Personalized mobile agents that infer user preferences and calibrate proactive assistance hold great promise as everyday digital assistants, yet existing benchmarks fail to capture what this requires.
  • Prior work evaluates preference recovery from static histories or intent prediction from fixed contexts.
  • Neither tests whether an agent can elicit missing preferences through interaction, nor whether it can decide when to intervene, seek consent, or remain silent in a live GUI environment.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Validate inferred eval signals (Simulation environment) against the full paper.
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

No related papers found for this item yet.

Get Started

Join the #1 Platform for AI Training Talent

Where top AI builders and expert AI Trainers connect to build the future of AI.
Self-Service
Post a Job
Post your project and get a shortlist of qualified AI Trainers and Data Labelers. Hire and manage your team in the tools you already use.
Managed Service
For Large Projects
Done-for-You
We recruit, onboard, and manage a dedicated team inside your tools. End-to-end operations for large or complex projects.
For Freelancers
Join as an AI Trainer
Find AI training and data labeling projects across platforms, all in one place. One profile, one application process, more opportunities.