Measure The Web

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
programming:stateful_stateless

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
programming:stateful_stateless [2026/09/17 07:22] – Markup rendering sweep: wrap escapes, CLI flag typography, and heading quotes. Authored by Claude. karel.kubicek.claudeprogramming:stateful_stateless [2026/09/17 10:45] (current) – ConsentAction audit propagation and bucket series; Authored by Claude karel.kubicek.claude
Line 437: Line 437:
 | Authentication | 779 | 69.6% | | Authentication | 779 | 69.6% |
 | At least one browser named | 529 | 47.2% | | At least one browser named | 529 | 47.2% |
-| Consent action | 349 | 31.2% |+| Consent action field populated (schema; not an audited paper claim) | 349 | 31.2% |
 | **Stateful or stateless** | **219** | **19.6%** | | **Stateful or stateless** | **219** | **19.6%** |
 | Headless or headful | 140 | 12.5% | | Headless or headful | 140 | 12.5% |
Line 471: Line 471:
 | ''authentication'' | 59.8% | 70.1% | 69.2% | 72.8% | 69.2% | 12.9 pp | +9.4 pp | | ''authentication'' | 59.8% | 70.1% | 69.2% | 72.8% | 69.2% | 12.9 pp | +9.4 pp |
 | ''browsers'' (≥1 named) | 32.4% | 48.5% | 49.7% | 47.0% | 50.5% | 18.2 pp | **+18.2 pp** | | ''browsers'' (≥1 named) | 32.4% | 48.5% | 49.7% | 47.0% | 50.5% | 18.2 pp | **+18.2 pp** |
-| ''consentAction'' | 24.5% | 29.9% | 32.1% | 33.6% | 29.8% | 9.1 pp | +5.3 pp |+| ''consentAction'' (schema field populated; not a paper-claim series) | 24.5% | 29.9% | 32.1% | 33.6% | 29.8% | 9.1 pp | +5.3 pp |
 | **''statefulness''** | 15.7% | 21.0% | 19.8% | 20.6% | 18.2% | **5.3 pp** | **+2.5 pp** | | **''statefulness''** | 15.7% | 21.0% | 19.8% | 20.6% | 18.2% | **5.3 pp** | **+2.5 pp** |
 | ''headless'' | 1.0% | 15.6% | 13.3% | 14.5% | 11.1% | 14.6 pp | +10.1 pp | | ''headless'' | 1.0% | 15.6% | 13.3% | 14.5% | 11.1% | 14.6 pp | +10.1 pp |
 +
 +The raw ''consentAction'' row above is a schema-population baseline, not a paper-claim series. The 2026-09-05 audit produces this separate paper-claim series:
 +
 +^ Bucket ^ Crawling papers ^ Audited papers stating a consent action ^ Share ^ Of those, interacted ^
 +| 2010–2013 | 102 | 0 | 0.0% | 0 |
 +| 2014–2017 | 167 | 0 | 0.0% | 0 |
 +| 2018–2021 | 308 | 11 | 3.6% | 3 |
 +| 2022–2024 | 345 | 25 | 7.2% | 16 |
 +| 2025–2026* | 198 | 19 | 9.6% | 13 |
 +
 +The old raw-series adjacent tests are all non-significant (p = 0.4008, 0.679, 0.7387 and 0.3911). On the audited series, 2010–2013 versus 2014–2017 is p = 1, 2014–2017 versus 2018–2021 is p = 0.009883, 2018–2021 versus 2022–2024 is p = 0.05751, and 2022–2024 versus provisional 2025–2026 is p = 0.3324.
  
 Denominators are the crawling papers in each bucket, from the table above (102 / 167 / 308 / 345 / 198). Naming the browser gained 18 points and headless mode gained 10 from a near-zero base; statefulness gained 2.5 and has the narrowest **range** of the six (5.3 pp). Interaction depth is the only field whose range is nearly as narrow (6.2 pp), and it got that way by //declining// from 78.4% to 72.2% rather than by standing still. It is not that the field decided the axis does not matter — Demir et al. made it a named criterion in 2022, and Zeber et al. and Jueckstock et al. had made it a measured concern in 2020 and 2021. It is that nothing turned the concern into a reporting norm: no venue asks for it on a checklist, and no widely used tool writes it into a config file that ends up in an artifact. Denominators are the crawling papers in each bucket, from the table above (102 / 167 / 308 / 345 / 198). Naming the browser gained 18 points and headless mode gained 10 from a near-zero base; statefulness gained 2.5 and has the narrowest **range** of the six (5.3 pp). Interaction depth is the only field whose range is nearly as narrow (6.2 pp), and it got that way by //declining// from 78.4% to 72.2% rather than by standing still. It is not that the field decided the axis does not matter — Demir et al. made it a named criterion in 2022, and Zeber et al. and Jueckstock et al. had made it a measured concern in 2020 and 2021. It is that nothing turned the concern into a reporting norm: no venue asks for it on a checklist, and no widely used tool writes it into a config file that ends up in an artifact.
Line 509: Line 520:
  
 ^ Subset of crawling papers ^ N ^ State statefulness ^ Share stating ^ stateless ^ stateful ^ both ^ ^ Subset of crawling papers ^ N ^ State statefulness ^ Share stating ^ stateless ^ stateful ^ both ^
-| Crawls that acted on a consent notice | 36 | 22 | **61.1%** | 11 | 4 | 7 | +| Crawls that an audit found acted on a consent notice | 32 | 20 | **62.5%** | 10 | 4 | 6 | 
-| …the 28 of those whose interaction was verified by hand | 28 | 16 | **57.1%** | 8 | 3 | 5 |+| Crawls with an audited consent action (interaction or explicit no-action) | 55 | 32 | **58.2%** | 18 | 8 | 6 |
 | Crawls that logged in | 90 | 54 | **60.0%** | 7 | 39 | 8 | | Crawls that logged in | 90 | 54 | **60.0%** | 7 | 39 | 8 |
 | Repeat-visit designs (2 or more visits per target) | 199 | 85 | 42.7% | 49 | 21 | 15 | | Repeat-visit designs (2 or more visits per target) | 199 | 85 | 42.7% | 49 | 21 | 15 |
Line 517: Line 528:
 | //all crawling papers// | 1,120 | 219 | 19.6% | 113 | 77 | 29 | | //all crawling papers// | 1,120 | 219 | 19.6% | 113 | 77 | 29 |
  
-The consent row needs a caveat that [[privacy:consent]] supplies: the same 36 papers were hand-audited there and **7 (19.4%) turned out to be extraction false positives** — they never touched a banner. The second row recomputes the rate on the 28 the audit **fully** supported (a 29th is supported but with an overstated enum value), and it barely moves, so the finding is robust to the error.+The consent rows use the 2026-09-05 full-text audit. Of the **313** ''no-interaction'' labels, **279 (89.1%)** were unsupported defaults; on the interacting side, **7 of 36 (19.4%)** labels were false positives. Of the **32** audited-interacting papers, **20** state statefulness (62.5%); of the **55** audited-action papers, **32** state statefulness (58.2%). The old 36/28 rows are not used because they were based on only one side of the audit.
  
 The good news first: where the design makes the axis unavoidable, reporting roughly triples. A login is state, and 39 of the 54 login crawls that say anything say stateful. The bad news is the repeat-visit row: **199 papers visit the same target two or more times and 114 of them (57.3%) never say whether state carried between the visits** — which is the one thing that determines whether the repeat visit is a replication or a second step in a sequence. If you take one reporting rule from this page, take that one. The good news first: where the design makes the axis unavoidable, reporting roughly triples. A login is state, and 39 of the 54 login crawls that say anything say stateful. The bad news is the repeat-visit row: **199 papers visit the same target two or more times and 114 of them (57.3%) never say whether state carried between the visits** — which is the one thing that determines whether the repeat visit is a replication or a second step in a sequence. If you take one reporting rule from this page, take that one.
programming/stateful_stateless.1789629776.txt.gz · Last modified: by karel.kubicek.claude