VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Aastha Pant
dblp:229/3473
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
3as first author
4since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · conflict
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 4 · 3 first-author · 4 since 2021
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Navigating fairness: practitioners' understanding, challenges, and strategies in AI/ML developmentabstractAbstract The rise in the use of AI/ML applications across industries has sparked more discussions about the fairness of AI/ML in recent times. While prior research on the fairness of AI/ML exists, there is a lack of empirical studies focused on understanding perspectives and experiences of AI practitioners in developing a fair AI/ML system. Understanding AI practitioners’ perspectives and experiences on the fairness of AI/ML systems is important because they are directly involved in its development and deployment and their insights can offer valuable real-world perspectives on the challenges associated with ensuring fairness in AI/ML systems. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 22 AI practitioners to investigate their understanding of what a ‘fair AI/ML’ is, the challenges they face in developing a fair AI/ML system, the consequences of developing an unfair AI/ML system, and the strategies they employ to ensure AI/ML system fairness. By exploring AI practitioners’ perspectives and experiences, this study provides actionable insights to enhance AI/ML fairness, which may promote fairer systems, reduce bias, and foster public trust in AI technologies. Additionally, we also identify areas for further investigation and offer recommendations to aid AI practitioners and AI companies in navigating fairness. Aastha Pant, Rashina Hoda, Chakkrit Tantithamthavorn, Burak Turhan |
Empir. Softw. Eng. | 1 |
| 2024 | Challenges, adaptations, and fringe benefits of conducting software engineering research with human participants during the COVID-19 pandemicabstractAbstract The COVID-19 pandemic changed the way we live, work and the way we conduct research. With the restrictions of lockdowns and social distancing, various impacts were experienced by many software engineering researchers, especially whose studies depend on human participants. We conducted a mixed methods study to understand the extent of this impact. Through a detailed survey with 89 software engineering researchers working with human participants around the world and a further nine follow-up interviews, we identified the key challenges faced, the adaptations made, and the surprising fringe benefits of conducting research involving human participants during the pandemic. Our findings also revealed that in retrospect, many researchers did not wish to revert to the old ways of conducting human-orienfted research. Based on our analysis and insights, we share recommendations on how to conduct remote studies with human participants effectively in an increasingly hybrid world when face-to-face engagement is not possible or where remote participation is preferred. Anuradha Madugalla, Tanjila Kanij, Rashina Hoda, Dulaji Hidellaarachchi, Aastha Pant, Samia Ferdousi, John C. Grundy |
Empir. Softw. Eng. | 5 |
| 2024 | Ethics in AI through the practitioner's view: a grounded theory literature reviewabstractAbstract The term ethics is widely used, explored, and debated in the context of developing Artificial Intelligence (AI) based software systems. In recent years, numerous incidents have raised the profile of ethical issues in AI development and led to public concerns about the proliferation of AI technology in our everyday lives. But what do we know about the views and experiences of those who develop these systems – the AI practitioners? We conducted a grounded theory literature review (GTLR) of 38 primary empirical studies that included AI practitioners’ views on ethics in AI and analysed them to derive five categories: practitioner awareness, perception, need, challenge, and approach. These are underpinned by multiple codes and concepts that we explain with evidence from the included studies. We present a taxonomy of ethics in AI from practitioners’ viewpoints to assist AI practitioners in identifying and understanding the different aspects of AI ethics. The taxonomy provides a landscape view of the key aspects that concern AI practitioners when it comes to ethics in AI. We also share an agenda for future research studies and recommendations for practitioners, managers, and organisations to help in their efforts to better consider and implement ethics in AI. Aastha Pant, Rashina Hoda, Chakkrit Tantithamthavorn, Burak Turhan |
Empir. Softw. Eng. | 1 |
| 2024 | Ethics in the Age of AI: An Analysis of AI Practitioners' Awareness and ChallengesabstractEthics in AI has become a debated topic of public and expert discourse in recent years. But what do people who build AI—AI practitioners—have to say about their understanding of AI ethics and the challenges associated with incorporating it into the AI-based systems they develop? Understanding AI practitioners’ views on AI ethics is important as they are the ones closest to the AI systems and can bring about changes and improvements. We conducted a survey aimed at understanding AI practitioners’ awareness of AI ethics and their challenges in incorporating ethics. Based on 100 AI practitioners’ responses, our findings indicate that the majority of AI practitioners had a reasonable familiarity with the concept of AI ethics, primarily due to workplace rules and policies . Privacy protection and security was the ethical principle that the majority of them were aware of. Formal education/training was considered somewhat helpful in preparing practitioners to incorporate AI ethics. The challenges that AI practitioners faced in the development of ethical AI-based systems included (i) general challenges, (ii) technology-related challenges, and (iii) human-related challenges. We also identified areas needing further investigation and provided recommendations to assist AI practitioners and companies in incorporating ethics into AI development. Aastha Pant, Rashina Hoda, Simone V. Spiegler, Chakkrit Tantithamthavorn, Burak Turhan |
ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. | 1 |