Comprehension of Ads-Supported and Paid Android Applications: Are They Different?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Android market is a place where developers offer paid and-or free apps to users. Free apps can follow the freemium or the ads-business model. While the former offers less features and the user is charged for unlocking additional features, the latter includes ads to allow developers to get a revenue. Free apps are interesting to users because they can try them immediately without incurring a monetary cost. However, free apps often have limited features and-or contain ads when compared to their paid counterparts. Thus, users may eventually need to pay to get additional features and-or remove ads. While paid apps have clear market values, their ads-supported versions are not entirely free because ads have an impact on performance. The hidden costs of ads, and the recent possibility to form family groups in Google Play to share purchased apps, make it difficult for developers and users to balance between visible and hidden costs of paid and ads-supported apps. In this paper, first, we perform an exploratory study about ads-supported and paid apps to understand their differences in terms of implementation and development process. We analyze 40 Android apps and we observe that (i) ads-supported apps are preferred by users although paid apps have a better rating, (ii) developers do not usually offer a paid app without a corresponding free version, (iii) ads-supported apps usually have more releases and are released more often than their corresponding paid versions, (iv) there is no a clear strategy about the way developers set prices of paid apps, (v) paid apps do not usually include more functionalities than their corresponding ads-supported versions, (vi) developers do not always remove ad networks in paid versions of their ads-supported apps, and (vii) paid apps require less permissions than ads-supported apps. Second, we carry out an experimental study to compare the performance of ads-supported and paid apps and we propose four equations to estimate the cost of ads-supported apps. We obtain that (i) ads-supported apps use more resources than their corresponding paid versions with statistically significant differences and (ii) paid apps could be considered a most cost-effective choice for users because their cost can be amortized in a short period of time, depending on their usage.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".