Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Kaixiang Dong

dblp:347/9484 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0009-0007-5734-7258ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Trustworthy machine learning · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Software testing · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness
0.912025
Boosting Generalizable Fairness With Mahalanobis Distances Guided Boltzmann Exploratory Testing · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › fairness › bias mitigation
fairness repair
0.912025
Boosting Generalizable Fairness With Mahalanobis Distances Guided Boltzmann Exploratory Testing · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › fairness › fairness evaluation
fairness testing
0.912025
Boosting Generalizable Fairness With Mahalanobis Distances Guided Boltzmann Exploratory Testing · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2025
Software testing › test generation
automated test generation
0.312025
Boosting Generalizable Fairness With Mahalanobis Distances Guided Boltzmann Exploratory Testing · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

mahalanobis distance · 1.7deep reinforcement learning · 1.7boltzmann exploration · 1.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Boosting Generalizable Fairness With Mahalanobis Distances Guided Boltzmann Exploratory Testing
abstract
Although machine learning models have been remarkably effective for decision-making tasks such as employment, insurance, and criminal justice, it remains urgent yet challenging to ensure model predictions are reliable and socially fair. This amounts to detecting and repairing potential discriminatory defects of machine learning models extensively with authentic testing data. In this paper, we propose a novel Mahalanobis distance guided Adaptive Exploratory Fairness Testing (MAEFT) approach, which searches for individual discriminatory instances (IDIs) through deep reinforcement learning with an adaptive extension of Boltzmann exploration, and significantly reduces overestimation. MAEFT uses Mahalanobis distances to guide the search with realistic correlations between input features. Thus, through learning a more accurate state-action value approximation, MAEFT can touch a much wider valid input space, reducing sharply the number of duplicate instances visited, and identify more unique tests and IDIs calibrated for the realistic feature correlations. Compared with state-of-the-art black-box and white-box fairness testing methods, our approach generates on average 4.65%-161.66% more unique tests and identifies 154.60%-634.80% more IDIs, with a performance speed-up of 12.54%-1313.47%. Moreover, the IDIs identified by MAEFT can be well exploited to repair the original models through retraining. These IDIs lead to, on average, a 59.15% boost in model fairness, 15.94%-48.73% higher than those identified by the state-of-the-art fairness testing methods. The models retrained with MAEFT also exhibit 37.66%-46.81% stronger generalization ability than those retrained with the state-of-the-art fairness testing methods.
Kaixiang Dong, Peng Wu 0002
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.1