Seeing Without Understanding: Large Language Model Evaluation of Mobile User Interface Quality, Failure Taxonomy, and Architectural Explanation
Evaluating mobile user interface quality at scale remains a persistent challenge in software engineering and human-computer interaction. Rule-based heuristic methods offer structural reliability but demand significant engineering effort, while human annotation does not scale to the volume of applications produced annually. Large language models present a promising alternative, yet their reliability for structured UI judgment has not been systematically examined, and the patterns behind their failures remain insufficiently characterized. This paper addresses both gaps. We begin with the complete RICO dataset of 66,261 real-world mobile application screens, from which we derive a refined evaluation corpus of 15,000 screens through a rigorous, literature-guided selection process. Each screen is assessed across seven criteria: structural JSON validity, minimum visible element count, clickable component presence, non-zero layout bounds, image integrity, and perceptual duplicate removal. Against this corpus, we apply a heuristic baseline built from severity-weighted usability signals, normalized layout metrics, and pixel-ratio complexity measures calibrated to real user sentiment. Multiple language models independently rate each screen across usability, layout quality, and visual complexity from structured JSON descriptions and raw screenshots. Dimension-level comparison against the heuristic uses agreement rates, Cohen's Kappa, and confidence calibration. Recurring divergence patterns are organized into a failure taxonomy and interpreted through transformer architectural signatures: MLE plausibility bias, attention misgrounding, and autoregressive over-commitment.