AccessGuru: Leveraging LLMs to Detect and Correct Web Accessibility Violations in HTML Code

July 24, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Nadeen Fathallah, Daniel HernΓ‘ndez, Steffen Staab arXiv ID 2507.19549 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Cross-listed cs.AI Citations 2 Venue International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
The vast majority of Web pages fail to comply with established Web accessibility guidelines, excluding a range of users with diverse abilities from interacting with their content. Making Web pages accessible to all users requires dedicated expertise and additional manual efforts from Web page providers. To lower their efforts and promote inclusiveness, we aim to automatically detect and correct Web accessibility violations in HTML code. While previous work has made progress in detecting certain types of accessibility violations, the problem of automatically detecting and correcting accessibility violations remains an open challenge that we address. We introduce a novel taxonomy classifying Web accessibility violations into three key categories - Syntactic, Semantic, and Layout. This taxonomy provides a structured foundation for developing our detection and correction method and redefining evaluation metrics. We propose a novel method, AccessGuru, which combines existing accessibility testing tools and Large Language Models (LLMs) to detect violations and applies taxonomy-driven prompting strategies to correct all three categories. To evaluate these capabilities, we develop a benchmark of real-world Web accessibility violations. Our benchmark quantifies syntactic and layout compliance and judges semantic accuracy through comparative analysis with human expert corrections. Evaluation against our benchmark shows that AccessGuru achieves up to 84% average violation score decrease, significantly outperforming prior methods that achieve at most 50%.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Software Engineering

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted