Source author record

Anthony Ventresque

Anthony Ventresque appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

The Forgotten Margins of AI Ethics

How has recent AI Ethics literature addressed topics such as fairness and justice in the context of continued social and structural power asymmetries? We trace both the historical roots and current landmark work that have been shaping the field and categorize these works under three broad umbrellas: (i) those grounded in Western canonical philosophy, (ii) mathematical and statistical methods, and (iii) those emerging from critical data/algorithm/information studies. We also survey the field and explore emerging trends by examining the rapidly growing body of literature that falls under the broad umbrella of AI Ethics. To that end, we read and annotated peer-reviewed papers published over the past four years in two premier conferences: FAccT and AIES. We organize the literature based on an annotation scheme we developed according to three main dimensions: whether the paper deals with concrete applications, use-cases, and/or people's lived experience; to what extent it addresses harmed, threatened, or otherwise marginalized groups; and if so, whether it explicitly names such groups. We note that although the goals of the majority of FAccT and AIES papers were often commendable, their consideration of the negative impacts of AI on traditionally marginalized groups remained shallow. Taken together, our conceptual analysis and the data from annotated papers indicate that the field would benefit from an increased focus on ethical analysis grounded in concrete use-cases, people's experiences, and applications as well as from approaches that are sensitive to structural and historical power asymmetries.

preprint2019arXiv

A Mutation-based Approach for Assessing Weight Coverage of a Path Planner

Autonomous cars are subjected to several different kind of inputs (other cars, road structure, etc.) and, therefore, testing the car under all possible conditions is impossible. To tackle this problem, scenario-based testing for automated driving defines categories of different scenarios that should be covered. Although this kind of coverage is a necessary condition, it still does not guarantee that any possible behaviour of the autonomous car is tested. In this paper, we consider the path planner of an autonomous car that decides, at each timestep, the short-term path to follow in the next few seconds; such decision is done by using a weighted cost function that considers different aspects (safety, comfort, etc.). In order to assess whether all the possible decisions that can be taken by the path planner are covered by a given test suite T, we propose a mutation-based approach that mutates the weights of the cost function and then checks if at least one scenario of T kills the mutant. Preliminary experiments on a manually designed test suite show that some weights are easier to cover as they consider aspects that more likely occur in a scenario, and that more complicated scenarios (that generate more complex paths) are those that allow to cover more weights.

preprint2016arXiv

Assessing and Improving the Mutation Testing Practice of PIT

Mutation testing is used extensively to support the experimentation of software engineering studies. Its application to real-world projects is possible thanks to modern tools that automate the whole mutation analysis process. However, popular mutation testing tools use a restrictive set of mutants which do not conform to the community standards as supported by the mutation testing literature. This can be problematic since the effectiveness of mutation depends on its mutants. We therefore examine how effective are the mutants of a popular mutation testing tool, named PIT, compared to comprehensive ones, as drawn from the literature and personal experience. We show that comprehensive mutants are harder to kill and encode faults not captured by the mutants of PIT for a range of 11% to 62% of the Java classes of the considered projects.