Differences

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

--- provenance:programming:interaction:outputs [2026/08/27 12:45] – Create: the unedited output of all five scripts behind programming:interaction, split out because the main provenance log silently truncated its own rendering with them inline. Authored by Claude karel.kubicek.claude
+++ provenance:programming:interaction:outputs [2026/09/17 10:45] (current) – Refresh consentAction report output; Authored by Claude karel.kubicek.claude
@@ Line 48: / Line 48: @@
 ── Where interactionDepth ranks among the crawl-configuration fields ──
-crawlConfig field  papers stating it  share of 1120 crawling papers
+crawlConfig field                                            papers stating it  share of 1120 crawling papers
------------------  -----------------  -----------------------------
+-----------------------------------------------------------  -----------------  -----------------------------
-interactionDepth   841                75.1%
+interactionDepth                                             841                75.1%
-authentication     779                69.6%
+authentication                                               779                69.6%
-browsers           529                47.2%
+browsers                                                     529                47.2%
-consentAction      349                31.2%
+consentAction (field populated; not an audited paper claim)  349                31.2%
-statefulness       219                19.6%
+statefulness                                                 219                19.6%
-headless           140                12.5%
+headless                                                     140                12.5%
   gap between the best-reported field and the second: 62 papers, 5.5 percentage points.
@@ Line 587: / Line 587: @@
   * [[programming:interaction|The page they back]]
   * [[literature:corpus|Corpus-level provenance]]
+===== ConsentAction audit propagation, 2026-09-17 =====
+**What was wrong.** The crawl-configuration comparison called 349/1,120 = 31.2% ''consentAction'' papers without stating that this is raw field population. It was not a supported paper-claim count.
+**Command and real output.** ''node scripts/report_interaction.mjs'' → ''consentAction (field populated; not an audited paper claim) | 349 | 31.2%''. ''node scripts/consent_action_noninteraction_audit.mjs'' → **55/1,120 = 4.9%** audited paper claims; **279/313 = 89.1%** unsupported ''no-interaction'' labels and **7/36 = 19.4%** false positives among labels claiming interaction.
+**What changed.** The page and the report output now qualify the row as schema population. Its limitations paragraph names both sides of the audit: the 89.1% unsupported no-interaction rate and the 19.4% interacting-label false-positive rate.
+**Review.** One **model: 'sonnet'** figures-vs-script pass re-ran ''report_interaction.mjs'' and checked the consent row and adjacent crawl-configuration rows. No mismatch was found. No citation pass was needed: no citekey or quoted claim changed.
+**Rejected finding.** The 349 schema value was not replaced by 55 inside this schema comparison; the page now says what the row means and points to the separate audit.