UI-Venus-2 Technical Report
UI-Venus-2 is a single GUI agent that operates across mobile, web, and desktop, scaling environments, tasks, and verification together
UI-Venus-2 is a GUI agent that looks at a screen and performs clicks, typing, and scrolling to automate tasks, now extended to cover 170+ mobile apps and native desktop operating systems alongside web. It generates instructions through a deep-research pipeline and uses trace-level and sample-level verifiers with multi-model voting to produce more reliable reinforcement-learning reward signals. The team evaluated the 27B and 9B versions of UI-Venus-2 against selected strong baselines across multiple GUI benchmarks.
METAL LAB explanatory visual
UI-Venus-2's Three-Stage Training Pipeline
Evidence statusMeasured results and planned work
- Mid-trainingInjects GUI interaction knowledge using large-scale trajectories collected across mobile, web, and OS environments.
- Domain-specific offline RLOptimizes Grounding, CAPTCHA, Mobile, Web, and Computer domains separately with step-level reinforcement learning.
- Multi-teacher on-policy distillation (MOPD)Consolidates domain-specialized models into one UI-Venus-2 model, concentrating supervision on executable action tokens.
- Trace- and sample-level verificationUses visual keypoints and multi-model voting to check trajectories and individual actions, supplying reliable reward signals for RL.
What they did
- The agent works through one unified closed-loop reasoning-action framework across mobile, web, and desktop environments: observe the screen, reason about task state, act, then adapt to feedback.
- Three dimensions were scaled jointly: environments (170+ multilingual mobile apps plus desktop OS), tasks (deep-research-based instruction generation), and verification (trace-level and sample-level evaluators).
- Training follows three stages: large-scale trajectory-based mid-training, domain-specific offline reinforcement learning, and multi-teacher on-policy distillation (MOPD) to merge domain experts into one model.
- In MOPD, reasoning text and executable actions are treated differently, concentrating the distillation signal on the action tokens that actually change the environment state.
- The system also integrates CAPTCHA-solving capability for login/registration gates and safety-aware mechanisms to control potentially consequential actions.

| Models | MobileGym | VenusBench-Mobile | AndroidWorld | MobileWorld | KnowUBench | MemGUI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| General VLMs | ||||||
| Qwen3.5-9B (Qwen Team, 2026a) | 9.0* | 15.3* | 57.8 | 18.0(18.0)* | 33.3 | 6.2* |
| Qwen3.6-27B (Qwen Team, 2026b) | 24.6* | 28.0* | 70.3 | 36.8(41.9)* | - | 25.7* |
| Claude-Opus-4.6 (Anthropic, 2026a) | - | 36.5* | - | 44.5 | - | - |
| Kimi-K2.6 (Moonshot AI, 2026a) | 38.7* | 31.2* | - | 55.6 | - | 39.1 |
| Kimi-K3 (Moonshot AI, 2026b) | - | - | - | 74.4 | - | - |
| Seed-2.0-Pro (Seed, 2026) | 52.0 | 20.1* | - | 63.2 | 51.6 | 65.6* |
| Seed-2.1-Pro (ByteDance Seed, 2026) | - | - | - | 73.2 | - | - |
| GPT-5.6-Sol (OpenAI, 2026) | - | - | - | 70.1 | - | - |
| GUI-specific Models | ||||||
| UI-Venus-1.5-8B (Team et al., 2026c) | 18.4* | 16.1 | 73.7 | 22.2* | 26.0 | 3.9* |
| UI-Venus-1.5-30B-A3B (Team et al., 2026c) | 21.5* | 21.5 | 77.6 | 17.1 | - | 10.9* |
| GUI-Owl-1.5-32B-Instruct (Xu et al., 2026) | 20.3* | - | 69.8 | 43.9 | - | 10.9 |
| MAI-UI-8B (Zhou et al., 2025b) | 21.5* | 12.7 | 70.7 | 27.5 | 26.0 | 17.2* |
| Qwen-UI-Agent-27B (Zhou et al., 2026) | - | - | - | 82.1(85.5) | - | - |
| Ours | ||||||
| UI-Venus-2-9B | 52.7 | 46.5 | 80.2 | 65.8(75.2) | 56.5 | 62.6 |
| UI-Venus-2-27B | 60.5 | 48.7 | 84.0 | 76.1(82.9) | 59.7 | 70.3 |

| Models | OSWorld-Verified | DeskCraft |
|---|---|---|
| General VLMs | ||
| Claude-Opus-4.8 (Zhou et al., 2026) | 83.4 | - |
| Qwen3.5-9B (Qwen Team, 2026a) | 41.8 | 14.6∗ |
| Qwen3.6-27B (Qwen Team, 2026b) | 62.0 | 28.7∗ |
| Kimi-K2.6 (Moonshot AI, 2026a) | 73.1 | 41.4∗ |
| Seed-2.0-Pro (Seed, 2026) | 62.3 | 40.0∗ |
| Seed-2.1-Pro (Zhou et al., 2026) | 78.8 | - |
| GPT-5.5 (Zhou et al., 2026) | 78.7 | - |
| GUI-specific Models | ||
| GUI-Owl-1.5-32B-Instruct (Xu et al., 2026) | 56.5 | - |
| Qwen-UI-Agent-27B (Zhou et al., 2026) | 79.5 | - |
| Ours | ||
| UI-Venus-2-9B | 70.8 | 48.0 |
| UI-Venus-2-27B | 80.5 | 55.5 |
| Models | WebVoyager | Online-Mind2Web | REAL | Odysseys | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avg. | Perfect | ||||
| General VLMs | |||||
| Qwen3.5-9B (Qwen Team, 2026a) | 46.9∗ | 27.3∗ | 18.2∗ | 42.6∗ | 13.5∗ |
| Qwen3.5-4B (Qwen Team, 2026a) | – | – | – | 42.9 | 10.7 |
| Qwen3.6-27B (Qwen Team, 2026b) | 84.3∗ | 55.3∗ | 27.3∗ | 39.5∗ | 18.5∗ |
| OpenAI Operator (OpenAI, 2025) | 87.0 | 61.3 | – | – | – |
| GPT-5 (SoM) (Awadallah et al., 2026) | 90.6 | – | – | – | – |
| GPT-5.4 (Singh et al., 2025) | – | – | – | 55.4 | 33.5 |
| Seed-2.0-Pro (Seed, 2026) | 85.1∗ | 68.5∗ | 74.4∗ | 60.2∗ | 30.1∗ |
| GLM-5V-Turbo (Hong et al., 2026) | 88.5 | – | – | – | – |
| Claude-Opus-4.6 (Anthropic, 2026a) | 88.0 | – | – | 68.9 | 44.5 |
| Claude-Sonnet-4.6 (Anthropic, 2026b) | – | – | – | 49.8 | 31.0 |
| Kimi-K2.6 (Moonshot AI, 2026a) | 76.8∗ | – | 74.4∗ | – | – |
| GUI-specific Models | |||||
| UI-TARS-1.5 (Seed, 2025b) | 84.8 | 75.8 | – | – | – |
| UI-Venus-1.5-30B-A3B (Team et al., 2026c) | 76.0 | – | 38.0∗ | – | – |
| GUI-Owl-1.5-32B-Thinking (Xu et al., 2026) | 82.1 | – | 44.6∗ | – | – |
| MolmoWeb-8B (Gupta et al., 2026) | 78.2 | 35.3 | – | – | – |
| Fara1.5-4B (Awadallah et al., 2026) | 80.8 | – | – | – | – |
| Fara1.5-9B (Awadallah et al., 2026) | 86.6 | 63.4 | – | – | – |
| Fara1.5-27B (Awadallah et al., 2026) | 89.3 | 72.3 | – | – | – |
| Ours | |||||
| UI-Venus-2-9B | 90.8 | 74.0 | 76.9 | 77.3 | 62.0 |
| UI-Venus-2-27B | 93.4 | 78.3 | 80.2 | 80.4 | 66.3 |

| Models | Grounding Benchmarks | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VenusBench-GD | ScreenSpot-Pro | OSworld-G-R | UI-Vision | |
| General VLMs | ||||
| Qwen 3.7 Plus (Qwen Team, 2026c) | 75.2* | 68.9 | 78.2 | 68.0 |
| Seed 2.1 Pro (ByteDance Seed, 2026) | 73.9* | 65.3 | 78.0 | 62.0 |
| Kimi-K2.6 (Moonshot AI, 2026a) | 73.1* | 52.0* | 69.7* | 51.7* |
| Qwen3.6-27B (Qwen Team, 2026b) | 67.7* | 65.2* | 76.9* | 58.3* |
| GUI-specific Models | ||||
| UI-Venus-Ground-72B (Gu et al., 2025) | 70.2 | 61.9 | 69.5 | 36.8 |
| Holo2-30B-A3B (H-Company, 2025) | 59.5* | 66.1 | 76.1 | 40.9* |
| Step-GUI-4B (Yan et al., 2025) | 54.6* | 60.0 | 66.9 | 30.0* |
| MAI-UI-8B (Zhou et al., 2025b) | 65.2* | 65.8 | 68.6 | 40.7 |
| MAI-UI-32B (Zhou et al., 2025b) | - | 67.9 | 73.9 | 47.1 |
| UI-Venus-1.5-30B-A3B (Team et al., 2026c) | 75.0 | 69.6 | 76.4 | 54.7 |
| Qwen-UI-Agent-27B (Zhou et al., 2026) | - | 76.6 | 78.5 | 70.0 |
| Ours | ||||
| UI-Venus-2-9B | 77.1 | 73.0 | 78.5 | 53.2 |
| UI-Venus-2-27B | 80.1 | 74.1 | 79.1 | 66.9 |

| Models | VenusBench- CAPTCHA | MCA-Bench | Spatial- CAPTCHA-Bench | NextGen- CAPTCHAs | Open CaptchaWorld |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| General VLMs | |||||
| Qwen3.5-9B (Qwen Team, 2026a) | 28.3 | 30.4 | 4.9 | 2.8 | 36.4 |
| Qwen3.6-27B (Qwen Team, 2026b) | 53.0 | 51.7 | 31.0 | 14.1 | 47.7 |
| Seed-2.0-Pro (Seed, 2026) | 47.9 | 36.5 | 43.8 | 20.4 | 55.6 |
| Kimi-K2.6 (Moonshot AI, 2026a) | 39.7 | 38.7 | 24.8 | 7.2 | 47.8 |
| Claude-Opus-4.6 (Anthropic, 2026a) | 16.0 | 25.9 | 9.5 | 2.8 | 23.3 |
| Ours | |||||
| UI-Venus-2-9B | 78.1 | 75.7 | 42.8 | 47.6 | 50.7 |
| UI-Venus-2-27B | 79.9 | 79.6 | 48.6 | 54.5 | 56.3 |
| Model | OSHarm (ASR ↓) | OSBlind (ASR ↓) |
|---|---|---|
| General VLMs | ||
| Qwen3.5-9B (Qwen Team, 2026a) | 25.3 | 79.4 |
| Qwen3.5-27B (Qwen Team, 2026a) | 18.0 | 89.3 |
| Kimi K2.6 (Moonshot AI, 2026a) | 32.0 | 93.6 |
| GUI-specific Models | ||
| EvoCUA-8B (Xue et al., 2026) | 39.3 | 85.3 |
| EvoCUA-32B (Xue et al., 2026) | 33.3 | 90.7 |
| UI-TARS-1.5 (Seed, 2025b) | 36.0 | 83.3 |
| ScaleCUA (Lv et al., 2026) | 25.3 | 84.7 |
| Ours | ||
| UI-Venus-2-9B | 11.3 | 48.8 |
| UI-Venus-2-27B | 15.3 | 47.9 |
| Action | Definition |
|---|---|
| Shared Actions (All Platforms) | |
| Click(point=(x, y)) | Click at coordinates (x, y). |
| Drag(start=(x1, y1), end=(x2, y2)) | Drag from (x1, y1) to (x2, y2). |
| Swipe(start=(x1, y1), end=(x2, y2)) | Scroll by swiping from (x1, y1) to (x2, y2). |
| DoubleClick(point=(x, y)) | Perform a double-click/tap at coordinates (x, y). |
| LongPress(point=(x, y)) | Long press at coordinates (x, y) to trigger extra options. |
| Type(content=”) | Type the specified content. |
| Wait() | Wait for loading. |
| CallUser(content=”) | Request user takeover or additional information. |
| Finished(content=”) | Mark the task as completed, with optional information. |
| Mobile†† Coordinates are normalized to [0,999]. | |
| PressBack() | Press the ‘back’ button. |
| PressHome() | Press the ‘home’ button. |
| PressEnter() | Press the ‘enter’ button. |
| PressRecent() | Press the ‘recent’ button. |
| LaunchApp(app=”) | Launch the specified app. |
| GetScreenshot() | Take a screenshot and save it to the photo album. |
| Answer(content=”) | Answer the user’s questions as requested. |
| Desktop†† Coordinates are normalized to [0,999]. | |
| RightClick(box=(x, y)) | Right-click at (x, y) to open context menus. |
| Hotkey(keys=[‘ctrl’, ‘c’]) | Press a keyboard shortcut, e.g., Ctrl+C for copy. |
| Web †† Coordinates are normalized to [0,999]. | |
| Scroll(point=(x, y), direction=‘up/down/left/right’) | Scroll at (x, y) in the specified direction. |
| Launch(url=”) | Launch the target URL. |
| GetUrl() | Get the URL of the current browser tab. |
| TakeNote(content=”) | Record important information from the screenshot. |
| Hover(point=(x, y)) | Move the mouse cursor to coordinates (x, y) without clicking. |
| Hotkey(keys=(‘ctrl’, ‘c’)) | Press combination keys (up to 3). |
| SelectOption(index=3) | Choose an option from a native HTML select element. |
| PressBack() | Return to the previous page. |
Findings
- Figure 1 and Tables 1-5 report evaluations of UI-Venus-2-27B and 9B against selected strong baselines on benchmarks including MobileWorld, WebVoyager, Odysseys, VenusBench-CAPTCHA, and VenusBench-GD.
- VenusBench-CAPTCHA was evaluated on 219 examples across eight interaction types (OCR text entry, ordered click, rotation, drag, slider puzzle, etc.) using Pass@1.
- Table 6 reports safety evaluation on the OSHARM and OS-BLIND benchmarks using Attack Success Rate (ASR), where lower is better.
- The paper reports that the action-type-conditioned distillation design in the MOPD stage yields more robust fusion results across diverse GUI domains.
Where it can be used
- Experimenting with automating repetitive mobile/web tasks such as logins and form-filling via screen-based interaction rather than APIs
- Building automation pipelines that need to handle CAPTCHA gates as part of the workflow
- Reference for designing general-purpose agents that also cover desktop OS tasks like file management or office software
- Reference for designing verification mechanisms (trace-level and sample-level, multi-model voting) for reinforcement learning reward signals
Limits and open work
- The paper itself notes that baseline comparisons may use different action scaffolds or evaluation protocols reported by their original sources, so comparisons are not fully apples-to-apples.
- Some benchmarks, such as OSWorld-Verified, are evaluated on a different task count (108 tasks) than the original benchmark's official setting (361 tasks), limiting direct comparability.
- Safety mechanisms were only verified on the OSHARM and OS-BLIND benchmarks; broader real-world risk scenarios are not addressed.
- Multilingual mobile coverage is limited to about 100+ Chinese and 70+ English apps, so performance on other languages/regions is unverified.
- The paper explicitly notes that live-web benchmark results may vary depending on the evaluation date because website states change.
Why it matters
GUI agents that perform well only on narrow benchmarks but break down on real apps, websites, and desktops are a major obstacle to practical automation. This work is notable for jointly scaling environment coverage, task generation, and verification reliability as a way to close that gap.
Terms in this paper
- GUI agent · An AI that operates software by performing human-like actions such as clicking and typing based on what it sees on screen
- Offline reinforcement learning · Reinforcement learning that trains on already-collected interaction data rather than live exploration
- Multi-teacher on-policy distillation (MOPD) · A training method where multiple teacher models score actions sampled by the student model itself to train the student
- Trajectory · The full sequence of screens and actions recorded while an agent performs one task
- VLM as a Judge · Using a vision-language model to evaluate and score the outputs of another model
Original abstract (English)
Multimodal GUI agents have emerged as a promising paradigm for digital task automation, yet transitioning from benchmark-oriented models to dependable real-world applications remains challenging due to limited environment coverage, brittle task construction, and unreliable reward verification. In this work, we present UI-Venus-2, a general-purpose foundation GUI agent designed to operate across mobile, web, and desktop environments through a unified closed-loop reasoning-action framework. To bridge the gap toward practical deployment, we jointly scale three critical dimensions: (1) Environments, expanding coverage to more than 170 multilingual mobile apps and native desktop operating systems; (2) Tasks, employing a deep-research pipeline for function-grounded instruction generation; and (3) Verification, adopting trace-level and sample-level evaluators with visual keypoints and multi-model voting to ensure reliable RL signals for training. Furthermore, we integrate safety-aware mechanisms to ensure controlled execution of consequential actions. By offering a capable, efficient, and open-source foundation, UI-Venus-2 advances the field toward more generalizable, verifiable, and self-reflective agents for real-world applications.
Read on arXivLatest papers
- GUI-CC: Benchmarking Contextual Consistency of GUI World Models as Agent EnvironmentsGUI world models can fake a plausible single screen, but chain several steps together and they often lose track of which app they're even in
- SHAPE of Chain-of-Thought in Math ReasoningA framework that tags each step of an AI's math 'thinking' with what mathematical move it's making and what interpretation it's stuck in, revealing why some reasoning succeeds and why RL training narrows a model's strategies
- CoVA-SFT: A Large-Scale Dataset for Chain of Visual AbstractionsA new 52K-example dataset teaches multimodal AI to 'draw while thinking' instead of writing everything in words
- CNeo-Bench: Diagnosing Large Language Models on Chinese NeologismsLLMs can often explain what Chinese internet slang like 886, yyds, or 彳亍 means, but many fail to reconstruct the original form behind it
- FIRSTPASS: A Multi-Domain, Multi-Round Peer Review Dataset Grounded in Real Editorial OutcomesA dataset that finally teaches AI what biology, chemistry, and physics peer reviewers actually argue about, not just CS reviewers
- JIT-Agent: Scaling Harness Intelligence via Just-in-Time Harness EvolutionAn AI system that writes a custom 'operating scaffold' for other AI agents on the spot, for every new task
- The Dialect Tax: Dialectal Biases Persist throughout the Language Modeling PipelineAI language models still charge a hidden 'dialect tax' on AAVE and other non-standard English at every stage, not just tokenization
- Sycophantic Chatbots Cause Delusional Spiraling, Even in Ideal BayesiansA math model shows that even a perfectly rational person can be talked into delusion by a chatbot that keeps agreeing with them
Latest from METAL LAB
- AI Models Skip Words to Talk Faster — A Fields Medalist Builds the Bridge Between Them
- ATV Big Air Tour cuts inventory work from three days to three hours with ChatGPT Work
- Inworld AI Launches Realtime TTS-2, Reigniting Race for Top Voice Synthesis Spot
- Google opens cyber defense AI to governments and enterprises through Fairwind program
- Perplexity Cited 215,000 Pages From Three AI-Targeted Sites
Figures: Venus Team et al., arXiv:2609.00028, arxiv-nonexclusive
