Constraint-Aware Refinement for Safety Verification of Neural Feedback Loops
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Neural networks (NNs) are becoming increasingly popular in the design of control pipelines for autonomous systems. However, since the performance of NNs can degrade in the presence of out-of-distribution data or adversarial attacks, systems that have NNs in their control pipelines, i.e., neural feedback loops (NFLs), need safety assurances before they can be applied in safety-critical situations. Reachability analysis offers a solution to this problem by calculating reachable sets that bound the possible future states of an NFL and can be checked against dangerous regions of the state space to verify that the system does not violate safety constraints. Since exact reachable sets are generally intractable to calculate, reachable set over approximations (RSOAs) are typically used. The problem with RSOAs is that they can be overly conservative, making it difficult to verify the satisfaction of safety constraints, especially over long time horizons or for highly nonlinear NN control policies. Refinement strategies such as partitioning or symbolic propagation are typically used to limit the conservativeness of RSOAs, but these approaches come with a high computational cost and often can only be used to verify safety for simple reachability problems. This paper presents Constraint-Aware Refinement for Verification (CARV): an efficient refinement strategy that reduces the conservativeness of RSOAs by explicitly using the safety constraints on the NFL to refine RSOAs only where necessary. We demonstrate that CARV can verify the safety of an NFL where other approaches either fail or take up to 60x longer and 40x the memory.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Sep 2024.
Builds on
12 of 18 references.
References · 12
- 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,642
- 2018Efficient Neural Network Robustness Certification with General Activation Functionscited by 445
- 2017Adversarial Examples: Attacks and Defenses for Deep Learningcited by 351
- 2015DeepDriving: Learning Affordance for Direct Perception in Autonomous Drivingcited by 231
- 2018Neural Lander: Stable Drone Landing Control using Learned Dynamicscited by 85
- 2021Reachability Analysis of Neural Feedback Loopscited by 41
- 2021OVERT: An Algorithm for Safety Verification of Neural Network Control Policies for Nonlinear Systemscited by 38
- 2022Backward Reachability Analysis of Neural Feedback Loops: Techniques for Linear and Nonlinear Systemscited by 18
- 2022One-Shot Reachability Analysis of Neural Network Dynamical Systemscited by 10
- 2022A Hybrid Partitioning Strategy for Backward Reachability of Neural Feedback Loopscited by 6
- 2018Specification-Guided Safety Verification for Feedforward Neural Networkscited by 4
- 2024TTT: A Temporal Refinement Heuristic for Tenuously Tractable Discrete Time Reachability Problemscited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 2.
4 papers.
- 2025Formal Safety Verification and Refinement for Generative Motion Planners via Certified Local Stabilizationcited by 2
- 2025Learning Verifiable Control Policies Using Relaxed Verificationcited by 1
- 2026Scalable Data-Driven Reachability Analysis and Control via Koopman Operators with Conformal Coverage Guaranteescited by 1
- 2026Stochastic World Models for Verifying Vision-Based Neural Feedback Systemscited by 0
- 2026Stochastic World Models for Verifying Vision-Based Neural Feedback Systems29 Sep 2026
- 2026Scalable Data-Driven Reachability Analysis and Control via Koopman Operators with Conformal Coverage Guarantees3 Jan 2026
- 2025Formal Safety Verification and Refinement for Generative Motion Planners via Certified Local Stabilization24 Sep 2025
- 2025Learning Verifiable Control Policies Using Relaxed Verification23 Apr 2025