imergo - Development of automated tools that support standards compliance and quality assurance methods for the production and maintenance of web portals
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
The design, management and maintenance of Web portals is becoming a challenge for the industry, that is confronted with an increasing amount of devices and user agents, due to the growing number of mobile platforms to be compatible with. On top of this, accessibility for people with special needs (enforced by legal frameworks in many European countries, the USA and Canada, among others) is generating additional complexity to the aforementioned processes, in times of critical budget constraints. This paper will describe how the combination of quality assurance methods with automated tools that support the implementation of standards and accessibility recommendations, can help companies to monitor and manage their compliance efforts in complex Web applications. We will also describe the limitations of existing tools, and present a new software suite developed by the Fraunhofer Institute FIT, successfully used and tested in several consultancy projects led by the authors.
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 | 0.014 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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