Differences

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

--- provenance:practices:ethics [2026/09/17 07:23] – Markup rendering sweep: wrap escapes, CLI flag typography, and heading quotes. Authored by Claude. karel.kubicek.claude
+++ provenance:practices:ethics [2026/09/17 10:45] (current) – Record consentAction schema clarification; Authored by Claude karel.kubicek.claude
@@ Line 173: / Line 173: @@
 How the robots.txt reporting rate compares with the other low-reporting enums (each against its own population,
 and counting `not-applicable` as a sentinel, which is how OVERVIEW.md counts them):
-Field                              Population N  Stated  Share
+Field                                                                      Population N  Stated  Share
----------------------------------  ------------  ------  -----
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------  ------------  ------  -----
-`ethics.robotsTxt`                 1120          53      4.7%
+`ethics.robotsTxt`                                                         1120          53      4.7%
-`crawlConfig.headless`             1120          140     12.5%
+`crawlConfig.headless`                                                     1120          140     12.5%
-`humanAnnotation.agreementMetric`  3318          512     15.4%
+`humanAnnotation.agreementMetric`                                          3318          512     15.4%
-`crawlConfig.statefulness`         1120          219     19.6%
+`crawlConfig.statefulness`                                                 1120          219     19.6%
-`crawlConfig.consentAction`        1120          349     31.2%
+`crawlConfig.consentAction (field populated; not an audited paper claim)`  1120          349     31.2%
-`ethics.reviewOutcome`             5118          1728    33.8%
+`ethics.reviewOutcome`                                                     5118          1728    33.8%
 Full-text cross-check: the literal string `robots.txt` appears anywhere in 55 of 1120 crawling papers (4.9%); 0 full-text files were missing.
 The sweep is the upper bound (it fires on a reference-list title too); the schema figure is the lower one. Both say the same thing.
@@ Line 478: / Line 478: @@
 | ''humanAnnotation.agreementMetric'' | 3,318 | 512 | 15.4% |
 | ''crawlConfig.statefulness'' | 1,120 | 219 | 19.6% |
-| ''crawlConfig.consentAction'' | 1,120 | 349 | 31.2% |
+| ''crawlConfig.consentAction'' (field populated; schema, not an audited paper claim) | 1,120 | 349 | 31.2% |
 | ''ethics.reviewOutcome'' | 5,118 | 1,728 | 33.8% |
@@ Line 755: / Line 755: @@
 Mechanical rendering repair only: a fresh live raw/XHTML export of 188 pages was checked with ''check_wrap.mjs'' and ''check_typography.mjs''. Affected plugin tags, CLI flags and heading markup were repaired; no figures or substantive prose were changed. The resulting source and rendered DOM were re-checked after saving.
+===== ConsentAction audit propagation, 2026-09-17 =====
+**What was wrong.** The reporting-completeness table presented 349/1,120 = 31.2% for ''crawlConfig.consentAction'' without distinguishing a populated extraction field from a claim supported by paper text. The number is correct as a schema statistic but was easy to read as the latter.
+**Command and real output.** ''node scripts/report_ethics.mjs'' → ''crawlConfig.consentAction (field populated; not an audited paper claim) | 1120 | 349 | 31.2%''. The companion ''node scripts/consent_action_noninteraction_audit.mjs'' output records **55/1,120 = 4.9%** audited papers stating an action and **279/313 = 89.1%** unsupported ''no-interaction'' labels.
+**What changed.** The page and its embedded report output now label 349 as field population and explain that paper-claim support is a separate audit result; no schema figure changed.
+**Review.** One **model: 'sonnet'** figures-vs-script pass re-ran ''report_ethics.mjs'' and checked the consent row plus the rows immediately before and after it. No mismatch was found. No citation pass was needed: no citekey or quoted claim changed.
+**Rejected finding.** The 349 schema count was not replaced by 55 in this table: the table is intentionally a reporting-completeness/schema table, while the audited claim count belongs to [[privacy:consent]].