跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.16107 · v1

Trained on What Screen Readers Cannot Read: Accessibility Debt in the GUI Corpora Behind Computer-Use Agents

首次提交 2026-11-12 07:28
版本更新 2026-11-12 07:28
雷达观测 2026-11-13 14:16
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Computer-use agents learn to operate mobile interfaces from corpora of captured screens and accessibility trees. The same trees are what a screen reader consumes, so an agent trained on them inherits whatever labelling gaps the underlying applications carry. This paper measures one of those gaps, content-description coverage, in two Android corpora: Rico, collected in 2017, and AndroidControl, collected in 2024. Across 17,373,614 interface elements, 17.74% of the Rico elements that need a content description under our coding rule carry one, against 57.27% in AndroidControl. The difference of 39.5 percentage points holds under five alternative coding rules and when whole apps are resampled. It describes two datasets that also differ in app selection, capture method and platform version; it does not measure change over time. Input controls are the least labelled role in both corpora (2.20% and 27.21%, or 30.99% in AndroidControl if hint text counts as a name). Descriptions in the older corpus are also five times more likely to be placeholders (10.25% against 1.95%), so the difference is not an artefact of developers typing filler. Resolving 26,205 task actions to the elements they touched shows that, among tappable graphics with no text, demonstrations operate elements described 9.0 points more often than the others on the screens they visit, about 3.5 points of it from the choice of element within a screen. That is a selection effect inside the benchmark. A two-coder reliability check (kappa = 0.91 and 0.96) and the full pipeline accompany the paper.

作者备注:8 pages, 2 figures, 6 tables. Accepted at the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Centric Systems, Services, and Applications (AISSA 2026), San Antonio, TX, USA, December 8-10, 2026

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只收录了一个版本。收录下一版后,可以对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-12 07:28 · 最新观测版本

Trained on What Screen Readers Cannot Read: Accessibility Debt in the GUI Corpora Behind Computer-Use Agents

Computer-use agents learn to operate mobile interfaces from corpora of captured screens and accessibility trees. The same trees are what a screen reader consumes, so an agent trained on them inherits whatever labelling gaps the underlying applications carry. This paper measures one of those gaps, content-description coverage, in two Android corpora: Rico, collected in 2017, and AndroidControl, collected in 2024. Across 17,373,614 interface elements, 17.74% of the Rico elements that need a content description under our coding rule carry one, against 57.27% in AndroidControl. The difference of 39.5 percentage points holds under five alternative coding rules and when whole apps are resampled. It describes two datasets that also differ in app selection, capture method and platform version; it does not measure change over time. Input controls are the least labelled role in both corpora (2.20% and 27.21%, or 30.99% in AndroidControl if hint text counts as a name). Descriptions in the older corpus are also five times more likely to be placeholders (10.25% against 1.95%), so the difference is not an artefact of developers typing filler. Resolving 26,205 task actions to the elements they touched shows that, among tappable graphics with no text, demonstrations operate elements described 9.0 points more often than the others on the screens they visit, about 3.5 points of it from the choice of element within a screen. That is a selection effect inside the benchmark. A two-coder reliability check (kappa = 0.91 and 0.96) and the full pipeline accompany the paper.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗