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

Fabrice Harel-Canada

dblp:274/6818 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
3as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
0009-0002-2431-4824ORCID · corroborated

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-author

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
2 papers
Language models and text generation · 56% Trustworthy machine learning · 44%
Network and information security
1 paper
Digital forensics and information hiding · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Software testing · 100%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Digital forensics and information hiding
watermarking
0.912025
Sandcastles in the Storm: Revisiting the (Im)possibility of Strong Watermarking · ACL (1) 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.812024
Measuring Psychological Depth in Language Models · EMNLP 2024
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model
0.812024
Measuring Psychological Depth in Language Models · EMNLP 2024
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › large language model evaluation › LLM behavior analysis
psycholinguistic evaluation of language models
0.812024
Measuring Psychological Depth in Language Models · EMNLP 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness
0.412020
Is neuron coverage a meaningful measure for testing deep neural networks? · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2020
Software testing
deep learning testing
0.412020
Is neuron coverage a meaningful measure for testing deep neural networks? · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2020
Software testing › test adequacy › coverage criteria
neuron coverage
0.412020
Is neuron coverage a meaningful measure for testing deep neural networks? · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2020

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

diversity promoting regularizer · 0.9adversarial attack · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Sandcastles in the Storm: Revisiting the (Im)possibility of Strong Watermarking
abstract
Fabrice Y Harel-Canada, Boran Erol, Connor Choi, Jason Liu, Gary Jiarui Song, Nanyun Peng, Amit Sahai. Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2025.
Fabrice Harel-Canada, Boran Erol, Connor Choi, Gary Jiarui Song, Nanyun Peng 0001, Amit Sahai
ACL (1)1
2024 Measuring Psychological Depth in Language Models
abstract
Fabrice Y Harel-Canada, Hanyu Zhou, Sreya Muppalla, Zeynep Senahan Yildiz, Miryung Kim, Amit Sahai, Nanyun Peng. Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 2024.
Fabrice Harel-Canada, Hanyu Zhou, Sreya Muppalla, Zeynep Yildiz, Miryung Kim, Amit Sahai, Nanyun Peng 0001
EMNLP1
2020 Is neuron coverage a meaningful measure for testing deep neural networks?
abstract
Recent effort to test deep learning systems has produced an intuitive and compelling test criterion called neuron coverage (NC), which resembles the notion of traditional code coverage. NC measures the proportion of neurons activated in a neural network and it is implicitly assumed that increasing NC improves the quality of a test suite. In an attempt to automatically generate a test suite that increases NC, we design a novel diversity promoting regularizer that can be plugged into existing adversarial attack algorithms. We then assess whether such attempts to increase NC could generate a test suite that (1) detects adversarial attacks successfully, (2) produces natural inputs, and (3) is unbiased to particular class predictions. Contrary to expectation, our extensive evaluation finds that increasing NC actually makes it harder to generate an effective test suite: higher neuron coverage leads to fewer defects detected, less natural inputs, and more biased prediction preferences. Our results invoke skepticism that increasing neuron coverage may not be a meaningful objective for generating tests for deep neural networks and call for a new test generation technique that considers defect detection, naturalness, and output impartiality in tandem.
Fabrice Harel-Canada, Lingxiao Wang 0001, Muhammad Ali Gulzar, Quanquan Gu, Miryung Kim
ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE1