Skip to content

Why Are GUI Agents Correct but Late? Decode on the Decision-Time Critical Path, Tested with Pre-Compiled Policy Trees

Jul 2026 · arXiv.org · Vol abs/2607.28399 · 0 citations · 25 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

Results suggest that AAPT performs best when candidate actions can be enumerated in advance, whereas reactive execution remains stronger when they cannot, and on an external benchmark, AAPT matches the overall performance of a reactive baseline, although the two methods exhibit complementary strengths.

Abstract

Computer-use agents often fail on transient GUI events because they produce the correct action only after the relevant window has already closed. We identify the main cause as expensive autoregressive decoding on the decision-time critical path. We propose Adaptive Anticipatory Policy Trees (AAPT), which eliminates this delay without modifying the underlying model. During idle screen periods, the same frozen multimodal model constructs a bounded conditional policy tree with observable guards, pre-authorized actions, and branch-specific deadlines. The tree is sized to cover the model's own decoding latency. When an event occurs, a lightweight observer matches change-gated frames to a prepared branch and immediately executes the corresponding action without generating new text. In paired trials with pre-registered endpoints and exact McNemar tests, AAPT improves the success rate from 0.50 to 0.79 within a contested decision window ($p=1.8\times10^{-3}$), while producing no incorrect actions. Both open-loop and predict-and-replan baselines achieve zero success because they still decode during execution. A preparation-time sweep shows that the gain emerges where the latency-based tree-sizing rule predicts, and ablations reveal three key requirements: fast observer decoding, valid tree planning, and accurate branch routing. A pre-registered oracle probe rejects our initial hypothesis and instead points to branch routing as the causal bottleneck. We further reproduce the effect on an independent general-purpose multimodal model over 126 paired trials ($p=4.9\times10^{-13}$). On an external benchmark, AAPT matches the overall performance of a reactive baseline, although the two methods exhibit complementary strengths. Together, these results suggest that AAPT performs best when candidate actions can be enumerated in advance, whereas reactive execution remains stronger when they cannot.

View source

Similar papers

Jul 2026

CheckVLA: Execution-Time Verification with Action-Conditioned World Model for Long-Horizon Mobile Manipulation

CheckVLA is proposed, which verifies execution with a separately trained, frozen action-conditioned world model, and results support action-conditioned verification as a way to restore feedback during chunked execution while keeping the repair consistent with inference latency.

Yu-Shan Liu, Pei-Bo Sun, Xin-Tao Chao et al. · 4 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Substrate-Aware AI Agents: Execution Context as a First-Class Input

A minimal execution contract induces proactive structural adaptation in generated programs, shifting computation away from unconstrained allocations and substantially improving observed resource-time profiles before execution, establishing a controlled proof of concept for substrate-aware agent planning.

Manu Agrawal · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Don't Solve, Just Compare: Tiny Advisors for Runtime Intervention in LLM Agents

Comparison-Only Tiny Advisor (COTA), a comparison-only framework for constructive runtime intervention that shows that constructive runtime intervention can remain effective even when the auxiliary model has substantially weaker task-solving capability than the actor.

Yan-Ze Jiang, Mingxuan Li, Yuhao Wang et al. · 2 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Recoverability as a System Primitive for Long-Horizon AI Agents

This work introduces recoverability as a system primitive that makes reuse an explicit decision: select a supported starting point and a permitted recovery action, or withhold automatic continuation, and establishes why recovery decisions need their own evaluation.

Zhi-Hui Zhang, Wei Liu · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.