Working log for roadmap. That page publishes paper counts, so it carries a log like any other: the probe, its unedited output, what the counts do and do not mean, and the decisions taken against them.

scripts/gap_probe_roadmap.mjs, committed with its output as scripts/gap_probe_roadmap-output.txt. It runs regular expressions over title + summary of every paper in the extraction and prints, per family, the number of matching papers, how many carry the web platform, and the 2020–2023 and 2024–2026 splits. Re-run it with a family name to print the matching titles, which is how every count on roadmap can be audited:

node scripts/gap_probe_roadmap.mjs             # the table
node scripts/gap_probe_roadmap.mjs llm_annotator

Output as of 2026-09-07, unedited:

family	papers	web	2020-2023	2024-2026
age_assurance	11	3	2	2
dsar_rights	9	7	1	6
ctv_streaming	16	1	5	5
llm_annotator	30	10	3	27
reproducibility	38	7	16	19
ai_crawlers	4	3	0	3
cdn_edge	48	23	15	8
browser_permissions	8	2	3	2
anti_adblock	3	3	1	1
payments_checkout	48	15	21	11
health_sensitive	16	4	4	4
webrtc_leak	6	4	3	3
sok_survey	44	6	14	21
crowdsourced_vantage	57	7	20	11

• They are candidate sets, not populations. A title-and-summary probe cannot see a paper that measured smart TVs without saying so in either field, so every count is a floor. A page written against one of these rows derives its own population from the structured fields and publishes that instead.
• They are not comparable across families. cdn_edge (48) and payments_checkout (48) are wide regular expressions that match incidental mentions; anti_adblock (3) is narrow and specific. A larger number is not a stronger case, which is why every disposition on roadmap names the reason rather than the rank.
• The year split is not a trend. 2025 is thin and 2026 is provisional — see corpus. The split is here because a family that is entirely pre-2020 is a different proposition from one that is entirely post-2024, not because the slope means anything.
• Reading the titles changed two dispositions, and this is the reason the probe prints them. age_assurance looks like 11 papers on age gates and is mostly COPPA and children's-privacy work; ctv_streaming looks like 16 papers with only one on the web platform and contains a coherent six-paper smart-TV tracking spine. Both rows on roadmap say so.

• Ten queued pages, with ids fixed so that later work lands in the right place. Four ids were open questions in the backlog and were decided here: privacy:policies rather than privacy:privacy_policies (which sorts next to this site's own privacy_policy page); programming:internet_scanning rather than design:scanning (an instrument, matching Crawler); statistics:annotation rather than statistics:classifier_validation or design:validation, because the page has to cover LLM annotation as well as validation; privacy:data_subject_rights to avoid colliding with Requests, which is web requests.
• statistics:annotation absorbs two backlog items — hoisting the label-validation section out of Website classification, and the LLM-as-annotator gap. They are one page: 30 candidate papers use an LLM to annotate, 27 of them in 2024–2026, and the corpus-wide 42.4% report-no-validation figure cannot live on a topic page without misstating that page's denominator.
• Connected TV and Age assurance are queued despite being thin, as an explicit editorial decision: a page that states a method and a small, dated literature is more useful to a student than silence, and the thinness is itself reportable. The line was drawn at WebRTC leaks (6 candidates) — below it sit WebAssembly and every other thinly-published web technology, and admitting one admits all.
• Six proposals were assessed and not written, with counts, on roadmap. Three become sections on existing pages rather than pages.

Red links are a defect on this wiki, and one drain item exists purely to clean up namespace-relative ones. roadmap is the single exception, and it is enforced rather than asserted: scripts/sitemap.mjs now checks that every promised-but-missing page on the whole wiki appears as the first link of a row in the Queued table, and that no Queued row's page already exists. It exits non-zero on either, after printing the full report.

Two consequences worth knowing before editing:

• The declaration is the first link in a row, deliberately. The second column links pages that do exist, and the Assessed table names pages that will never be written; counting every link in the table would license a red link anywhere on the page.
• ?do=sitemap is cached, so a page created minutes ago is absent from that listing. roadmap is therefore fetched directly and added before any page is scanned — without that, its declared red links are never seen and the gate passes vacuously. That is the same shape of silent pass this script produced on 2026-09-05, when an origin change made it report “Distinct internal link targets: 0” with exit 0.

The queued list is what the corpus supports as of 2026-09-07 and it is not a schedule. Two rows are conditional in substance even though they read as commitments: statistics:annotation depends on the LLM-annotation slice surviving a hand audit of its 30 candidates, and Connected TV will need its population derived from platform fields rather than the probe, because the probe's web-platform column is exactly the wrong filter for it. The Assessed table's SSO/WebAuthn row is gated on an audit that has not been run: 46 candidates, unaudited, and the probe catches attacks on OAuth as well as deployment measurement.