Enabling Cost-Effective UI Automation Testing with Retrieval-Based LLMs: A Case Study in WeChat
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
UI automation tests play a crucial role in ensuring the quality of mobile applications. Despite the growing popularity of machine learning techniques to generate these tests, they still face several challenges, such as the mismatch of UI elements. The recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have addressed these issues by leveraging their semantic understanding capabilities. However, a significant gap remains in applying these models to industrial-level app testing, particularly in terms of cost optimization and knowledge limitation. To address this, we introduce CAT to create cost-effective UI automation tests for industry apps by combining machine learning and LLMs with best practices. Given the task description, CAT employs Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) to source examples of industrial app usage as the few-shot learning context, assisting LLMs in generating the specific sequence of actions. CAT then employs machine learning techniques, with LLMs serving as a complementary optimizer, to map the target element on the UI screen. Our evaluations on the WeChat testing dataset demonstrate the CAT's performance and cost-effectiveness, achieving 90% UI automation with 0.34 cost, outperforming the state-of-the-art. We have also integrated our approach into the real-world WeChat testing platform, demonstrating its usefulness in detecting 141 bugs and enhancing the developers' testing process.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 12 Sep 2024.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 5; 2026: 1.
6 papers.
- 2025GUI-explorer: Autonomous Exploration and Mining of Transition-aware Knowledge for GUI Agentcited by 35
- 2025Agent for User: Testing Multi-User Interactive Features in TikTokcited by 5
- 2025Breaking Single-Tester Limits: Multi-Agent LLMs for Multi-User Feature Testingcited by 1
- 2025GUISpector: An MLLM Agent Framework for Automated Verification of Natural Language Requirements in GUI Prototypescited by 1
- 2025From User Interface to Agent Interface: Efficiency Optimization of UI Representations for LLM Agentscited by 0
- 2026Practical Limits of Autonomous Test Repair: A Multi-Agent Case Study with LLM-Driven Discovery and Self-Correctioncited by 0
- 2026Practical Limits of Autonomous Test Repair: A Multi-Agent Case Study with LLM-Driven Discovery and Self-Correction2 May 2026
- 2025From User Interface to Agent Interface: Efficiency Optimization of UI Representations for LLM Agents15 Dec 2025
- 2025GUISpector: An MLLM Agent Framework for Automated Verification of Natural Language Requirements in GUI Prototypes6 Oct 2025
- 2025Breaking Single-Tester Limits: Multi-Agent LLMs for Multi-User Feature Testing21 Jun 2025
- 2025GUI-explorer: Autonomous Exploration and Mining of Transition-aware Knowledge for GUI Agent22 May 2025
- 2025Agent for User: Testing Multi-User Interactive Features in TikTok21 Apr 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024UICrit: Enhancing Automated Design Evaluation with a UICritique Dataset
- 2025Retrieval-Augmented Generation in Industry: An Interview Study on Use Cases, Requirements, Challenges, and Evaluation
- 2024MobileAIBench: Benchmarking LLMs and LMMs for On-Device Use Cases
- 2025LELANTE: LEveraging LLM for Automated ANdroid TEsting ↗
- 2026Do LLMs Need to See Everything? A Benchmark and Study of Failures in LLM-driven Smartphone Automation using Screentext vs. Screenshots
- 2024Zero-Shot Prompting Approaches for LLM-based Graphical User Interface Generation
- 2024Automated test generation to evaluate tool-augmented LLMs as conversational AI agents
- 2023AutoDroid: LLM-powered Task Automation in Android