Data poisoning aims to compromise a machine learning based software component by contaminating its training set to change its prediction results for test inputs. Existing methods for deciding data-poisoning robustness have either poor accuracy or long running time and, more importantly, they can only certify some of the truly-robust cases, but remain inconclusive when certification fails. In other words, they cannot falsify the truly-non-robust cases. To overcome this limitation, we propose a systematic testing based method, which can falsify as well as certify data-poisoning robustness for a widely used supervised-learning technique named k-nearest neighbors (KNN). Our method is faster and more accurate than the baseline enumeration method, due to a novel over-approximate analysis in the abstract domain, to quickly narrow down the search space, and systematic testing in the concrete domain, to find the actual violations. We have evaluated our method on a set of supervised-learning datasets. Our results show that the method significantly outperforms state-of-the-art techniques, and
can decide data-poisoning robustness of KNN prediction results for most of the test inputs.