EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Marie Shvakel
dblp:354/6156
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 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% | |
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Visualization and visual analytics · 100% | |
| Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper |
Human-AI interaction · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | My Model is Unfair, Do People Even Care? Visual Design Affects Trust and Perceived Bias in Machine Learning · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2024 |
Visualization and visual analytics › visual analytics
machine learning visualization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | My Model is Unfair, Do People Even Care? Visual Design Affects Trust and Perceived Bias in Machine Learning · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
controlled study · 2.3crowdsourced experiment · 1.5crowd-sourced experiment · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | My Model is Unfair, Do People Even Care? Visual Design Affects Trust and Perceived Bias in Machine LearningabstractMachine learning technology has become ubiquitous, but, unfortunately, often exhibits bias. As a consequence, disparate stakeholders need to interact with and make informed decisions about using machine learning models in everyday systems. Visualization technology can support stakeholders in understanding and evaluating trade-offs between, for example, accuracy and fairness of models. This paper aims to empirically answer "Can visualization design choices affect a stakeholder's perception of model bias, trust in a model, and willingness to adopt a model?" Through a series of controlled, crowd-sourced experiments with more than 1,500 participants, we identify a set of strategies people follow in deciding which models to trust. Our results show that men and women prioritize fairness and performance differently and that visual design choices significantly affect that prioritization. For example, women trust fairer models more often than men do, participants value fairness more when it is explained using text than as a bar chart, and being explicitly told a model is biased has a bigger impact than showing past biased performance. We test the generalizability of our results by comparing the effect of multiple textual and visual design choices and offer potential explanations of the cognitive mechanisms behind the difference in fairness perception and trust. Our research guides design considerations to support future work developing visualization systems for machine learning. Aimen Gaba, Zhanna Kaufman, Jason Cheung, Marie Shvakel, Kyle Wm. Hall, Yuriy Brun, Cindy Xiong Bearfield |
IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. | 4 |