Confidence Composition for Monitors of Verification Assumptions
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Closed-loop verification of cyber-physical systems with neural network controllers offers strong safety guarantees under certain assumptions. It is, however, difficult to determine whether these guarantees apply at run time because verification assumptions may be violated. To predict safety violations in a verified system, we propose a three-step confidence composition (CoCo) framework for monitoring verification assumptions. First, we represent the sufficient condition for verified safety with a propositional logical formula over assumptions. Second, we build calibrated confidence monitors that evaluate the probability that each assumption holds. Third, we obtain the confidence in the verification guarantees by composing the assumption monitors using a composition function suitable for the logical formula. Our CoCo framework provides theoretical bounds on the calibration and conservatism of compositional monitors. Two case studies show that compositional monitors are calibrated better than their constituents and successfully predict safety violations.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 54 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Nov 2021.
Builds on
14 of 54 references.
References · 14
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
- 2018Addressing Function Approximation Error in Actor-Critic Methodscited by 2,417
- 2020NNV: The Neural Network Verification Tool for Deep Neural Networks and Learning-Enabled Cyber-Physical Systemscited by 128
- 2018Verisig: verifying safety properties of hybrid systems with neural network controllerscited by 84
- 2018Probabilistically Safe Robot Planning with Confidence-Based Human Predictionscited by 28
- 2018SOTER: A Runtime Assurance Framework for Programming Safe Robotics Systemscited by 25
- 2020PAC Confidence Predictions for Deep Neural Network Classifierscited by 21
- 2021ReSonAte: A Runtime Risk Assessment Framework for Autonomous Systemscited by 9
- 2020Quantifying Assurance in Learning-enabled Systemscited by 4
- 2018Verified Runtime Validation for Partially Observable Hybrid Systemscited by 3
- 2021Assurance Monitoring of Learning Enabled Cyber-Physical Systems Using Inductive Conformal Prediction based on Distance Learningcited by 3
- 2016Monitoring Assumptions in Assume-Guarantee Contractscited by 1
2 more
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 3; 2024: 2; 2025: 1.
6 papers.
- 2023How Safe Am I Given What I See? Calibrated Prediction of Safety Chances for Image-Controlled Autonomycited by 8
- 2023Bridging Dimensions: Confident Reachability for High-Dimensional Controllerscited by 5
- 2024Language-Enhanced Latent Representations for Out-of-Distribution Detection in Autonomous Drivingcited by 4
- 2024Physically Interpretable World Models via Weakly Supervised Representation Learningcited by 3
- 2025How Safe Will I Be Given What I Saw? Calibrated Prediction of Safety Chances for Image-Controlled Autonomycited by 1
- 2023Causal Repair of Learning-enabled Cyber-physical Systemscited by 0
- 2025How Safe Will I Be Given What I Saw? Calibrated Prediction of Safety Chances for Image-Controlled Autonomy12 Aug 2025
- 2024Physically Interpretable World Models via Weakly Supervised Representation Learning17 Dec 2024
- 2024Language-Enhanced Latent Representations for Out-of-Distribution Detection in Autonomous Driving2 May 2024
- 2023Bridging Dimensions: Confident Reachability for High-Dimensional Controllers8 Nov 2023
- 2023How Safe Am I Given What I See? Calibrated Prediction of Safety Chances for Image-Controlled Autonomy23 Aug 2023
- 2023Causal Repair of Learning-enabled Cyber-physical Systems6 Apr 2023