mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Verifying Global Neural Network Specifications using Hyperproperties

arXiv 2306.12495 ↗First posted 21 Jun 2023cs.LG cs.LOcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Current approaches to neural network verification focus on specifications that target small regions around known input data points, such as local robustness. Thus, using these approaches, we can not obtain guarantees for inputs that are not close to known inputs. Yet, it is highly likely that a neural network will encounter such truly unseen inputs during its application. We study global specifications that - when satisfied - provide guarantees for all potential inputs. We introduce a hyperproperty formalism that allows for expressing global specifications such as monotonicity, Lipschitz continuity, global robustness, and dependency fairness. Our formalism enables verifying global specifications using existing neural network verification approaches by leveraging capabilities for verifying general computational graphs. Thereby, we extend the scope of guarantees that can be provided using existing methods. Recent success in verifying specific global specifications shows that attaining strong guarantees for all potential data points is feasible.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Jun 2023.

Builds on

24 of 36 references.

References · 24

  1. 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
  2. 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,114
  3. 2016Identity Mappings in Deep Residual Networkscited by 1,960
  4. 2017Spectrally-normalized margin bounds for neural networkscited by 681
  5. 2017Parseval Networks: Improving Robustness to Adversarial Examplescited by 288
  6. 2020Large image datasets: A pyrrhic win for computer vision?cited by 237
  7. 2023GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Modelscited by 174
  8. 2019Deep ReLU Networks Have Surprisingly Few Activation Patternscited by 160
  9. 2017Fairness Testing: Testing Software for Discriminationcited by 123
  10. 2021Globally-Robust Neural Networkscited by 106
  11. 2022General Cutting Planes for Bound-Propagation-Based Neural Network Verificationcited by 102
  12. 2018Reachability Analysis of Deep Neural Networks with Provable Guaranteescited by 93
12 more
  1. 2022Complete Verification via Multi-Neuron Relaxation Guided Branch-and-Boundcited by 92
  2. 2021The Second International Verification of Neural Networks Competition (VNN-COMP 2021): Summary and Resultscited by 71
  3. 2019Perfectly Parallel Fairness Certification of Neural Networkscited by 42
  4. 2022The Third International Verification of Neural Networks Competition (VNN-COMP 2022): Summary and Resultscited by 39
  5. 2020Counterexample-Guided Learning of Monotonic Neural Networkscited by 34
  6. 2020ReluDiff: Differential Verification of Deep Neural Networkscited by 29
  7. 2020How Good is your Explanation? Algorithmic Stability Measures to Assess the Quality of Explanations for Deep Neural Networkscited by 27
  8. 2017Towards Proving the Adversarial Robustness of Deep Neural Networkscited by 26
  9. 2022CertiFair: A Framework for Certified Global Fairness of Neural Networkscited by 17
  10. 2021LipBaB: Computing exact Lipschitz constant of ReLU networkscited by 16
  11. 2022Efficient Global Robustness Certification of Neural Networks via Interleaving Twin-Network Encodingcited by 15
  12. 2021SpecRepair: Counter-Example Guided Safety Repair of Deep Neural Networkscited by 6

Built on by

Not cited yet.