PapersWithELO
← ICLR 2024 leaderboard

Reinforced UI Instruction Grounding: Towards a Generic UI Task Automation API

Zhizheng Zhang, Wenxuan Xie, Xiaoyi Zhang, Yan Lu

representation learningUI task automationInstruction groundingRL for computer vision
39.20100
Fused
band ≈ ±15 pct pts (from σ = 0.30)
53.20100
Mimo
band ≈ ±23 pct pts (from σ = 0.45)
31.40100
DeepSeek
band ≈ ±20 pct pts (from σ = 0.41)

OpenReview ground truth

Rejected

Abstract

Recent popularity of Large Language Models (LLMs) has opened countless possibilities in automating numerous AI tasks by connecting LLMs to various domain-specific models or APIs, where LLMs serve as dispatchers while domain-specific models or APIs are action executors. Despite the vast numbers of domain-specific models/APIs, they still struggle to comprehensively cover super diverse automation demands in the interaction between human and User Interfaces (UIs). In this work, we build a multimodal model to ground natural language instructions in given UI screenshots as a generic UI task automation executor. This metadata-free grounding model, consisting of a visual encoder and a language decoder, is first pretrained on well studied document understanding tasks and then learns to decode spatial information from UI screenshots in a promptable way. To facilitate the exploitation of image-to-text pretrained knowledge, we follow the \textit{pixel-to-sequence} paradigm to predict geometric coordinates in a sequence of tokens using a language decoder. We further propose an innovative Reinforcement Learning (RL) based algorithm to supervise the tokens in such sequence jointly with visually semantic metrics, which effectively strengthens the spatial decoding capability of the \textit{pixel-to-sequence} paradigm. Extensive experiments demonstrate our proposed reinforced UI instruction grounding model outperforms the state-of-the-art methods by a clear margin and shows the potential as a generic UI task automation API.

Author context

Most prolific author: 9 submissions (credibility 1.00).

No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).

Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.

Ranking trajectory

Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.

Judge assessments

Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 32)