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

Sara Solarova

dblp:349/4685 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0003-2800-3572ORCID · reported

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

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 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.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Human-AI interaction · 100%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Trustworthy machine learning · 100%
Network and information security
1 paper
Privacy and data protection · 100%

Topics — the 1 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Human-AI interaction
algorithmic auditing
1.012026
Beyond the Checkbox: Strengthening DSA Compliance Through Social Media Algorithmic Auditing · CHI 2026

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

user simulation · 3.0behavioral assessment · 3.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 Beyond the Checkbox: Strengthening DSA Compliance Through Social Media Algorithmic Auditing
abstract
Algorithms of online platforms are required under the Digital Services Act (DSA) to comply with specific obligations concerning algorithmic transparency, user protection and privacy. To verify compliance with these requirements, DSA mandates platforms to undergo independent audits. Little is known about current auditing practices and their effectiveness in ensuring such compliance. To this end, we bridge regulatory and technical perspectives by critically examining selected audit reports across three critical algorithmic-related provisions: restrictions on profiling minors, transparency in recommender systems, and limitations on targeted advertising using sensitive data. Our analysis shows significant inconsistencies in methodologies and lack of technical depth when evaluating AI-powered systems. To enhance the depth, scale, and independence of compliance assessments, we propose to employ algorithmic auditing – a process of behavioural assessment of AI algorithms by means of simulating user behaviour, observing algorithm responses and analysing them for audited phenomena.
Sara Solarova, Matús Mesarcík, Branislav Pecher, Ivan Srba
CHI1