Cited by 4Mobile and Web ApplicationsSoftware System Performance and ReliabilitySoftware Engineering Research

A Comparative Study of Android Performance Issues in Real-World Applications and Literature

Open access
Liao, Dianshu, Pan, Shidong, Yang, Siyuan, Zhao, Yanjie, Xing, Zhenchang, Sun, Xiaoyu·2026·ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology

Abstract

Performance issues in Android applications significantly undermine users’ experience, engagement, and retention, which is a long-lasting research topic in academia. Unlike functionality issues, performance issues are more difficult to diagnose and resolve due to their complex root causes, which often emerge only under specific conditions or payloads. Although many efforts have attempted to mitigate the impact of performance issues by developing methods to automatically identify and resolve them, it remains unclear if this objective has been fulfilled, and the existing approaches indeed targeted on the most critical performance issues encountered in real-world settings. To this end, we conduct a large-scale comparative study of Android performance issues in real-world applications and literature. Specifically, we started by investigating real-world performance issues, their underlying root causes (i.e., contributing factors), and common code patterns. We then took an additional step to empirically summarize existing approaches and datasets through a literature review, assessing how well academic research reflects the real-world challenges faced by developers and users. Our comparison results show a substantial divergence exists in the primary performance concerns of researchers, developers, and users. Among all the identified factors, 57.14% have not been examined in academic research, while a substantial 63.41% remain unaddressed by existing tools, and 70.73% lack corresponding datasets. This stark contrast underscores a substantial gap in our understanding and management of performance issues. Consequently, it is crucial for our community to intensify efforts to bridge these gaps and achieve comprehensive detection and resolution of performance issues.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3771932

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Authors
Liao, D., Pan, S., Yang, S., Zhao, Y., Xing, Z., & Sun, X.
Affiliations
  • Australian National University (AU)
  • Huazhong University of Science and Technology (CN)
Venue
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
Published
2026-07-11
Volume
35
Issue
7
Pages
1-32
ISSN
  • 1049-331X (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7392
OpenAlex
W4415261640
Cited by
4
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4
FWCI
2.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Mobile and Web Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Software System Performance and Reliability
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
Keywords
mobile application performance, root cause analysis, real-world applications, user experience

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review