javascript structural fix in main.js and page_header.js, and AI policy observatory update

Author: jfparie

assets/scss/templates/_main.scss

@@ -751,7 +751,7 @@ vertical-align: top;
 
 li {
   font-family: avenir, sans-serif;
-  font-size: 15px;
+  line-height: 1.7;
 }
 
 .rounded-blue-border {

content/.DS_Store

@@ -129,24 +129,28 @@ form1:
   title: React to this normative judgement
   content: >-
     Your reaction will be sent to the team maintaining algoprudence. A team will
-    review your response and, if it complies with the guidelines, it will be placed in the Discussion & debate section
-    above.
+    review your response and, if it complies with the guidelines, it will be
+    placed in the Discussion & debate section above.
   button_text: Submit
   backend_link: 'https://formspree.io/f/xyyrjyzr'
   id: case-reaction
   questions:
-    - label: Name
+    - label: |
+        Name
       id: name
       required: true
       type: text
-    - label: Affiliated organization
+    - label: |
+        Affiliated organization
       id: affiliated-organization
       type: text
-    - label: Reaction
+    - label: |
+        Reaction
       id: reaction
       required: true
       type: textarea
-    - label: Contact details
+    - label: |
+        Contact details
       id: contact-details
       required: true
       type: text
@@ -228,6 +232,8 @@ Dowload the full report and problem statement [here](https://drive.google.com/f
 * explainability requirements for the used explainable boosting algorithm
 * implications of the AIAct for this particular form of risk profiling.
 
+{{< pdf_frame articleUrl1="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oPiO_s9KuV7446BqC9a4P2qjW7MGUyxu/preview" >}}
+
 {{< accordion_item_close >}}
 
 {{< accordion_item_open title="Binnenlands Bestuur" image="/images/algoprudence/AA202302/Actions/logo-bb.svg" id="binnenlands-bestuur" date="01-12-2023" tag1="news" >}}

content/english/algoprudence/cases/aa202302_risk-profiling-for-social-welfare-reexamination.md

@@ -46,10 +46,9 @@ events:
       CEN-CENELEC Dublin
     image: /images/events/jtc21.jpg
     date: 13-02-2024
-    pdf: /pdf-files/20240213_JTC21_plenary_FRIAs_stakeholder_panels.pdf
     facets:
       - value: type_presentation
-        label: Presentation
+        label: presentation
       - value: year_q1_2024
         label: Q1-2024
         hide: true
@@ -69,7 +68,7 @@ events:
         label: Q1-2024
         hide: true
       - value: type_panel
-        label: Panel discussion
+        label: panel discussion
   - title: University of Groningen (RUG) AI Act event
     description: |
       Sharing buttom-up experience on auditing AI during panel discussion.
@@ -83,7 +82,7 @@ events:
         label: Q1-2024
         hide: true
       - value: type_panel
-        label: Panel discussion
+        label: panel discussion
   - title: >-
       Presentation Bias Detection Tool study association Christiaan Huygens TU
       Delft
@@ -92,7 +91,6 @@ events:
       Delft
     image: /images/events/mathematics and computer science tu delft.png
     date: 08-01-2024
-    pdf: /pdf-files/20240108_BDT_TU_Delft.pdf
     facets:
       - value: '2024'
         label: '2024'
@@ -101,7 +99,7 @@ events:
         label: Q1-2024
         hide: true
       - value: type_presentation
-        label: Presentation
+        label: presentation
   - title: >-
       Presentation on inclusive, deliberative stakeholder panels – Working Group
       1 Inclusiveness JTC21 CEN-CENELEC
@@ -114,7 +112,7 @@ events:
     pdf: /pdf-files/20240107_AA_stakeholder_panels.pdf
     facets:
       - value: type_presentation
-        label: Presentation
+        label: presentation
       - value: year_q1_2024
         label: Q1-2024
         hide: true
@@ -133,7 +131,8 @@ events:
     pdf: ''
     facets:
       - value: type_event
-        label: Event
+        label: event
+        hide: false
       - value: year_q3_2023
         label: Q3-2023
         hide: true
@@ -184,6 +183,9 @@ events:
 
 
 
+
+
+
 
 
 

content/english/events/activities.md

@@ -1,16 +1,25 @@
 ---
-title: White paper – Feedback on DSA Delegated Regulation (conducting independent audits)
+title: >-
+  Algorithm Audit (white paper) – Feedback on DSA Delegated Regulation (conducting independent
+  audits)
 author: Algorithm Audit
 image: /images/knowledge_base/white-paper-3.png
-type: featured
-summary: 'Plea to include the normative dimension of AI auditing in delegated regulation of the Digital Services Act (DSA). Current limitations are illustrated by focussing on a recommender systems example'
-
+type: regular
+summary: >-
+  Plea to include the normative dimension of AI auditing in delegated regulation
+  of the Digital Services Act (DSA). Current limitations are illustrated by
+  focussing on a recommender systems example
+subtitle: ''
 ---
-Feedback to the European Commission on DSA Delegated Regulation – conducting independent audits. 
+
+Feedback to the European Commission on DSA Delegated Regulation – conducting independent audits.
 
 ###### **Summary**
+
 In addition to Article 37 of the Digital Services Act (DSA), Delegated Regulation (DR) sets out procedures, methodologies and templates for third-party auditing of Very Large Open Platforms (VLOPs) and Very Large Online Search Engines (VLOSEs). The DR builds upon established sector-specific risk management frameworks to provide procedural guidance for AI audits. However, the regulation lacks provisions to disclose normative methodological choices that underlie AI systems (e.g., recommender systems), which is crucial for evaluating associated risks in a meaningful way (as mandated by DSA Article 34). To illustrate this limitation, we elaborate on methodological crossroads that determine the performance of recommender systems and its downstream risks. We make concrete suggestions how the definition of ‘inherent risk’ (Article 2), audit methodologies of risk assessments (Section IV) and the audit report template (Annex I) set out by the DR should be amended to incorporate normative dimension of AI auditing in a meaningful way. Only if both the technical and normative dimension of AI systems are thoroughly examined, risk assessed under the DSA will empower the European Union and its citizens to determine what public values should to be safeguarded in the digital world.
 
 {{< container_open >}}
-{{< pdf_frame title="White-paper" name="white-paper" articleUrl="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_Raxsm0wDO_0cSVfPLzS9AzCFNviBUaO/preview" >}}
+
+{{< pdf_frame >}}
+
 {{< container_close >}}