MobileUPReg: Identifying User-Perceived Performance Regressions in Mobile OS Versions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mobile operating systems (OS) are frequently updated, but such updates can unintentionally degrade user experience by introducing performance regressions. Existing detection techniques often rely on system-level metrics (e.g., CPU or memory usage) or focus on specific OS components, which may miss regressions actually perceived by users—such as slower responses or UI stutters. To address this gap, we present MobileUPReg, a black-box framework for detecting user-perceived performance regressions across OS versions. MobileUPReg runs the same apps under different OS versions and compares user-perceived performance metrics—response time, finish time, launch time, and dropped frames—to identify regressions that are truly perceptible to users. In a large-scale study, MobileUPReg achieves high accuracy in extracting user-perceived metrics and detects user-perceived regressions with 0.96 precision, 0.91 recall, and 0.93 F1-score—significantly outperforming a statistical baseline using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test and Cliff’s Delta. MobileUPReg has been deployed in an industrial CI pipeline, where it analyzes thousands of screencasts across hundreds of apps daily and has uncovered regressions missed by traditional tools. These results demonstrate that MobileUPReg enables accurate, scalable, and perceptually aligned regression detection for mobile OS validation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it