Uncertainty Quantification for Computer-Use Agents: A Benchmark across Vision-Language Models and GUI Grounding Datasets

Divake Kumar, Sina Tayebati, Devashri Naik, Amanda Sofie Rios, Nilesh Ahuja +3 more
6/24/2026
cs.LGcs.AIcs.CL

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Computer-use agents turn vision-language model (VLM) predictions into executable GUI clicks, so reliable uncertainty estimates are essential for rejection, calibration, miss-severity ranking, and spatial safety regions. Yet evidence on post-hoc uncertainty quantification (UQ) for these agents is fragmented across isolated model and dataset pairs, leaving it unclear whether UQ rankings stay stable when the agent, benchmark, or observable interface changes. We present Argus, a cross-regime benchmark for post-hoc UQ in single-step executable GUI grounding: a 27-method open-weight matrix over 4 VLM agents and 4 datasets, plus an 8-method closed-source matrix across 3 frontier vendors where logits, hidden states, and attention maps are unavailable. Evaluated methods span logit-based scores, sampling and consistency measures, hidden-state and density estimators (Mahalanobis, SAPLMA), attention-based scores, P(True) and verbalised-confidence prompting, and split-conformal prediction. The main finding is selective transfer: UQ rankings are stable across datasets for a fixed model, but degrade across model classes and observable interfaces. Hidden-state and density methods are the most stable open-weight family, while CoCoA-1MCA, Focus, sampling-based scores, and verbalised self-assessment win in specific regimes. Within-model ranking transfer is strong (Spearman rho up to 0.969), but cross-tier transfer to closed-source vendors averages only +0.08, so closed-source UQ should be reranked on the target rather than extrapolated. Conformal click regions show score-level discrimination is not enough for deployment: locally weighted disks shrink radii by 40-60% when the plug-in UQ is calibrated, but coverage degrades under calibration-test or interface mismatch. We release per-item records, calibration/test splits, UQ scores, and analysis scripts for regime-aware UQ selection in GUI agents.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{kumar2026uncertainty,
  title  = {Uncertainty Quantification for Computer-Use Agents: A Benchmark across Vision-Language Models and GUI Grounding Datasets},
  author = {Divake Kumar and Sina Tayebati and Devashri Naik and Amanda Sofie Rios and Nilesh Ahuja and Omesh Tickoo and Ranganath Krishnan and Amit Ranjan Trivedi},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2606.25760},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.25760v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2606.25760.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2606.25760)

Discussion