Astraea: Grammar-based Fairness Testing
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Software often produces biased outputs. In particular, machine learning (ML) based software are known to produce erroneous predictions when processing discriminatory inputs. Such unfair program behavior can be caused by societal bias. In the last few years, Amazon, Microsoft and Google have provided software services that produce unfair outputs, mostly due to societal bias (e.g. gender or race). In such events, developers are saddled with the task of conducting fairness testing. Fairness testing is challenging; developers are tasked with generating discriminatory inputs that reveal and explain biases. We propose a grammar-based fairness testing approach (called ASTRAEA) which leverages context-free grammars to generate discriminatory inputs that reveal fairness violations in software systems. Using probabilistic grammars, ASTRAEA also provides fault diagnosis by isolating the cause of observed software bias. ASTRAEA's diagnoses facilitate the improvement of ML fairness. ASTRAEA was evaluated on 18 software systems that provide three major natural language processing (NLP) services. In our evaluation, ASTRAEA generated fairness violations with a rate of ~18%. ASTRAEA generated over 573K discriminatory test cases and found over 102K fairness violations. Furthermore, ASTRAEA improves software fairness by ~76%, via model-retraining.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 6 Oct 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 0; 2023: 3; 2024: 2; 2025: 3.
11 papers.
- 2021Dynaboard: An Evaluation-As-A-Service Platform for Holistic Next-Generation Benchmarkingcited by 53
- 2025A Coreset Selection of Coreset Selection Literature: Introduction and Recent Advancescited by 28
- 2021Investigating Failures of Automatic Translation in the Case of Unambiguous Gendercited by 20
- 2023Towards Fair Machine Learning Software: Understanding and Addressing Model Bias Through Counterfactual Thinkingcited by 14
- 2021AequeVox: Automated Fairness Testing of Speech Recognition Systemscited by 9
- 2023"Oops, Did I Just Say That?" Testing and Repairing Unethical Suggestions of Large Language Models with Suggest-Critique-Reflect Processcited by 9
- 2024A Catalog of Fairness-Aware Practices in Machine Learning Engineeringcited by 4
- 2024MAFT: Efficient Model-Agnostic Fairness Testing for Deep Neural Networks via Zero-Order Gradient Searchcited by 4
- 2025Do Existing Testing Tools Really Uncover Gender Bias in Text-to-Image Models?cited by 4
- 2025FairSense: Long-Term Fairness Analysis of ML-Enabled Systemscited by 3
- 2023Distribution-aware Fairness Test Generationcited by 0
- 2025A Coreset Selection of Coreset Selection Literature: Introduction and Recent Advances23 May 2025
- 2025Do Existing Testing Tools Really Uncover Gender Bias in Text-to-Image Models?27 Jan 2025
- 2025FairSense: Long-Term Fairness Analysis of ML-Enabled Systems3 Jan 2025
- 2024MAFT: Efficient Model-Agnostic Fairness Testing for Deep Neural Networks via Zero-Order Gradient Search28 Dec 2024
- 2024A Catalog of Fairness-Aware Practices in Machine Learning Engineering29 Aug 2024
- 2023Distribution-aware Fairness Test Generation8 May 2023
- 2023"Oops, Did I Just Say That?" Testing and Repairing Unethical Suggestions of Large Language Models with Suggest-Critique-Reflect Process4 May 2023
- 2023Towards Fair Machine Learning Software: Understanding and Addressing Model Bias Through Counterfactual Thinking16 Feb 2023
- 2021AequeVox: Automated Fairness Testing of Speech Recognition Systems19 Oct 2021
- 2021Dynaboard: An Evaluation-As-A-Service Platform for Holistic Next-Generation Benchmarking21 May 2021
- 2021Investigating Failures of Automatic Translation in the Case of Unambiguous Gender16 Apr 2021