Zhanna Kaufman
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Zhanna Kaufman has a total of 14 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Yuriy Brun
University of Massachusetts, Amherst, USA
4 shared publications - Alex Sanchez-Stern
model, San Francisco, USA
3 shared publications - Emily First
Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA
3 shared publications - Cindy Xiong Bearfield
Interactive Computing, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
2 shared publications - Talia Ringer
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, USA
2 shared publications - Timothy Zhou
University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, USA
2 shared publications
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 12 April 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1327-1340
ProofCoop: Collaborative Automated Formal Verification
- 12 April 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1327-1340
Open AccessProofCoop: Collaborative Automated Formal Verification
- 5 December 2025
- Published by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) in IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
- Vol. 32 (1) , 637-647
Your Model Is Unfair, Are You Even Aware? Inverse Relationship Between Comprehension and Trust in Explainability Visualizations of Biased ML Models
Systems relying on ML have become ubiquitous, but so has biased behavior within them. Research shows that bias significantly affects stakeholders' trust in systems and how they use them. Further, stakeholders of different backgrounds view and trust the same systems differently. Thus, how ML models' behavior is explained plays a key role in comprehension and trust. We survey explainability visualizations, creating a taxonomy of design characteristics. We conduct user studies to evaluate five state-of the-art visualization tools (LIME, SHAP, CP, Anchors, and ELI5) for model explainability, measuring how taxonomy characteristics affect comprehension, bias perception, and trust for non-expert ML users. Surprisingly, we find an inverse relationship between comprehension and trust: the better users understand the models, the less they trust them. We investigate the cause and find that this relationship is strongly mediated by bias perception: more comprehensible visualizations increase people's perception of bias, and increased bias perception reduces trust. We confirm this relationship is causal: Manipulating explainability visualizations to control comprehension, bias perception, and trust, we show that visualization design can significantly (p < 0.001) increase comprehension, increase perceived bias, and reduce trust. Conversely, reducing perceived model bias, either by improving model fairness or by adjusting visualization design, significantly increases trust even when comprehension remains high. Our work advances understanding of how comprehension affects trust and systematically investigates visualization's role in facilitating responsible ML applications.
- 5 December 2025
- Published by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) in IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
- Vol. 32 (1) , 637-647
Your Model Is Unfair, Are You Even Aware? Inverse Relationship Between Comprehension and Trust in Explainability Visualizations of Biased ML Models
Systems relying on ML have become ubiquitous, but so has biased behavior within them. Research shows that bias significantly affects stakeholders' trust in systems and how they use them. Further, stakeholders of different backgrounds view and trust the same systems differently. Thus, how ML models' behavior is explained plays a key role in comprehension and trust. We survey explainability visualizations, creating a taxonomy of design characteristics. We conduct user studies to evaluate five state-of the-art visualization tools (LIME, SHAP, CP, Anchors, and ELI5) for model explainability, measuring how taxonomy characteristics affect comprehension, bias perception, and trust for non-expert ML users. Surprisingly, we find an inverse relationship between comprehension and trust: the better users understand the models, the less they trust them. We investigate the cause and find that this relationship is strongly mediated by bias perception: more comprehensible visualizations increase people's perception of bias, and increased bias perception reduces trust. We confirm this relationship is causal: Manipulating explainability visualizations to control comprehension, bias perception, and trust, we show that visualization design can significantly (p < 0.001) increase comprehension, increase perceived bias, and reduce trust. Conversely, reducing perceived model bias, either by improving model fairness or by adjusting visualization design, significantly increases trust even when comprehension remains high. Our work advances understanding of how comprehension affects trust and systematically investigates visualization's role in facilitating responsible ML applications.
- Open Access
Your Model Is Unfair, Are You Even Aware? Inverse Relationship Between Comprehension and Trust in Explainability Visualizations of Biased ML Models
Systems relying on ML have become ubiquitous, but so has biased behavior within them. Research shows that bias significantly affects stakeholders' trust in systems and how they use them. Further, stakeholders of different backgrounds view and trust the same systems differently. Thus, how ML models' behavior is explained plays a key role in comprehension and trust. We survey explainability visualizations, creating a taxonomy of design characteristics. We conduct user studies to evaluate five state-of-the-art visualization tools (LIME, SHAP, CP, Anchors, and ELI5) for model explainability, measuring how taxonomy characteristics affect comprehension, bias perception, and trust for non-expert ML users. Surprisingly, we find an inverse relationship between comprehension and trust: the better users understand the models, the less they trust them. We investigate the cause and find that this relationship is strongly mediated by bias perception: more comprehensible visualizations increase people's perception of bias, and increased bias perception reduces trust. We confirm this relationship is causal: Manipulating explainability visualizations to control comprehension, bias perception, and trust, we show that visualization design can significantly (p < 0.001) increase comprehension, increase perceived bias, and reduce trust. Conversely, reducing perceived model bias, either by improving model fairness or by adjusting visualization design, significantly increases trust even when comprehension remains high. Our work advances understanding of how comprehension affects trust and systematically investigates visualization's role in facilitating responsible ML applications.
Open AccessYour Model Is Unfair, Are You Even Aware? Inverse Relationship Between Comprehension and Trust in Explainability Visualizations of Biased ML Models
Systems relying on ML have become ubiquitous, but so has biased behavior within them. Research shows that bias significantly affects stakeholders' trust in systems and how they use them. Further, stakeholders of different backgrounds view and trust the same systems differently. Thus, how ML models' behavior is explained plays a key role in comprehension and trust. We survey explainability visualizations, creating a taxonomy of design characteristics. We conduct user studies to evaluate five state-of-the-art visualization tools (LIME, SHAP, CP, Anchors, and ELI5) for model explainability, measuring how taxonomy characteristics affect comprehension, bias perception, and trust for non-expert ML users. Surprisingly, we find an inverse relationship between comprehension and trust: the better users understand the models, the less they trust them. We investigate the cause and find that this relationship is strongly mediated by bias perception: more comprehensible visualizations increase people's perception of bias, and increased bias perception reduces trust. We confirm this relationship is causal: Manipulating explainability visualizations to control comprehension, bias perception, and trust, we show that visualization design can significantly (p < 0.001) increase comprehension, increase perceived bias, and reduce trust. Conversely, reducing perceived model bias, either by improving model fairness or by adjusting visualization design, significantly increases trust even when comprehension remains high. Our work advances understanding of how comprehension affects trust and systematically investigates visualization's role in facilitating responsible ML applications.
- Open Access
- 26 June 2023
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) in ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems
- Vol. 45 (2) , 1-30
Passport: Improving Automated Formal Verification Using Identifiers
Formally verifying system properties is one of the most effective ways of improving system quality, but its high manual effort requirements often render it prohibitively expensive. Tools that automate formal verification by learning from proof corpora to synthesize proofs have just begun to show their promise. These tools are effective because of the richness of the data the proof corpora contain. This richness comes from the stylistic conventions followed by communities of proof developers, together with the powerful logical systems beneath proof assistants. However, this richness remains underexploited, with most work thus far focusing on architecture rather than on how to make the most of the proof data. This article systematically explores how to most effectively exploit one aspect of that proof data: identifiers.We develop the Passport approach, a method for enriching the predictive Coq model used by an existing proof-synthesis tool with three new encoding mechanisms for identifiers: category vocabulary indexing, subword sequence modeling, and path elaboration. We evaluate our approach’s enrichment effect on three existing base tools: ASTactic, Tac, and Tok. In head-to-head comparisons, Passport automatically proves 29% more theorems than the best-performing of these base tools. Combining the three tools enhanced by the Passport approach automatically proves 38% more theorems than combining the three base tools. Finally, together, these base tools and their enhanced versions prove 45% more theorems than the combined base tools. Overall, our findings suggest that modeling identifiers can play a significant role in improving proof synthesis, leading to higher-quality software.
- 26 June 2023
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) in ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems
- Vol. 45 (2) , 1-30
Open AccessPassport: Improving Automated Formal Verification Using Identifiers
Formally verifying system properties is one of the most effective ways of improving system quality, but its high manual effort requirements often render it prohibitively expensive. Tools that automate formal verification by learning from proof corpora to synthesize proofs have just begun to show their promise. These tools are effective because of the richness of the data the proof corpora contain. This richness comes from the stylistic conventions followed by communities of proof developers, together with the powerful logical systems beneath proof assistants. However, this richness remains underexploited, with most work thus far focusing on architecture rather than on how to make the most of the proof data. This article systematically explores how to most effectively exploit one aspect of that proof data: identifiers.We develop the Passport approach, a method for enriching the predictive Coq model used by an existing proof-synthesis tool with three new encoding mechanisms for identifiers: category vocabulary indexing, subword sequence modeling, and path elaboration. We evaluate our approach’s enrichment effect on three existing base tools: ASTactic, Tac, and Tok. In head-to-head comparisons, Passport automatically proves 29% more theorems than the best-performing of these base tools. Combining the three tools enhanced by the Passport approach automatically proves 38% more theorems than combining the three base tools. Finally, together, these base tools and their enhanced versions prove 45% more theorems than the combined base tools. Overall, our findings suggest that modeling identifiers can play a significant role in improving proof synthesis, leading to higher-quality software.
- 1 May 2023
- Published by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
- p. 26-30
PRoofster: Automated Formal Verification
Formal verification is an effective but extremely work-intensive method of improving software quality. Verifying the correctness of software systems often requires significantly more effort than implementing them in the first place, despite the existence of proof assistants, such as Coq, aiding the process. Recent work has aimed to fully automate the synthesis of formal verification proofs, but little tool support exists for practitioners. This paper presents oofster, a web-based tool aimed at assisting developers with the formal verification process via proof synthesis. oofster inputs a Coq theorem specifying a property of a software system and attempts to automatically synthesize a formal proof of the correctness of that property. When it is unable to produce a proof, oofster outputs the proof-space search tree its synthesis explored, which can guide the developer to provide a hint to enable oofster to synthesize the proof. oofster runs online at https://proofster.cs.umass.edu/ and a video demonstrating oofster is available at https://youtu.be/xQAi66IRfwI/.
- 1 May 2023
- Published by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
- p. 26-30
PRoofster: Automated Formal Verification
Formal verification is an effective but extremely work-intensive method of improving software quality. Verifying the correctness of software systems often requires significantly more effort than implementing them in the first place, despite the existence of proof assistants, such as Coq, aiding the process. Recent work has aimed to fully automate the synthesis of formal verification proofs, but little tool support exists for practitioners. This paper presents oofster, a web-based tool aimed at assisting developers with the formal verification process via proof synthesis. oofster inputs a Coq theorem specifying a property of a software system and attempts to automatically synthesize a formal proof of the correctness of that property. When it is unable to produce a proof, oofster outputs the proof-space search tree its synthesis explored, which can guide the developer to provide a hint to enable oofster to synthesize the proof. oofster runs online at https://proofster.cs.umass.edu/ and a video demonstrating oofster is available at https://youtu.be/xQAi66IRfwI/.