Modeling web quality using a probabilistic approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Web-based applications are software systems that continuously evolve to meet users' needs and to adapt to new technologies. Assuring their quality is then a difficult, but essential task. In fact, a large number of factors can affect their quality. Considering these factors and their interaction involves managing uncertainty and subjectivity inherent to this kind of applications. In this article, we present a probabilistic approach for building Web quality models and the associated assessment method. The proposed approach is based on Bayesian Networks. A model is built following a four-step process consisting in collecting quality characteristics, refining them, building a model structure, and deriving the model parameters. The feasibility of the approach is illustrated on the important quality characteristic of Navigability design . To validate the produced model, we conducted an experimental study with 20 subjects and 40 web pages. The results obtained show that the scores given by the used model are strongly correlated with navigability as perceived and experienced by the users.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it