mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Lipschitz-Based Robustness Certification Under Floating-Point Execution

arXiv 2603.13334 ↗First posted 6 Mar 2026cs.LG cs.CV cs.PLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Lipschitz-based robustness certification bounds a network's sensitivity through concrete numerical computation rather than symbolic reasoning, and so scales efficiently. It is increasingly used even where verifiable guarantees matter. Yet, as with most prior work on robustness certification and verification, soundness is typically proved against a semantic model assuming exact real arithmetic. Deployed networks instead execute in floating-point, creating a gap between certified properties and executed behaviour. As motivating evidence, we give counterexamples showing that real arithmetic robustness guarantees can fail under floating-point execution, even for previously verified certifiers. We then develop a formal, compositional theory relating real arithmetic Lipschitz-based sensitivity bounds to floating-point execution under standard rounding-error models for feed-forward ReLU networks. We derive sound conditions for floating-point robustness, including bounds on certificate degradation and sufficient conditions for the absence of overflow. We also give an efficient floating-point Gram iteration algorithm for Lipschitz bounds and prove that it never under-estimates the true norm. Separately, when a model is certified pre-deployment, we show how measuring its actual deviation against a high-precision execution can substantially reduce certificate degradation. We formalise the theory and its soundness, and implement an executable certifier, evaluated across dense networks spanning image, tabular, and many-class classification. To our knowledge, ours is the first method for soundly accounting for floating-point effects in Lipschitz-based robustness certification, and, done efficiently, the first floating-point-sound robustness checking procedure of any kind to certify models' entire test set -- seven those with 500,000 examples -- while retaining enough precision to be practical.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 32 of its 62 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Mar 2026.

Builds on

32 of 62 references.

References · 32

  1. 2017Fashion-MNIST: a Novel Image Dataset for Benchmarking Machine Learning Algorithmscited by 4,283
  2. 2015DeepFool: a simple and accurate method to fool deep neural networkscited by 1,315
  3. 2017Reluplex: An Efficient SMT Solver for Verifying Deep Neural Networkscited by 739
  4. 2018Regularisation of Neural Networks by Enforcing Lipschitz Continuitycited by 311
  5. 2018Towards Fast Computation of Certified Robustness for ReLU Networkscited by 254
  6. 2018Adversarial Robustness Toolbox v1.0.0cited by 214
  7. 2020Fast and Complete: Enabling Complete Neural Network Verification with Rapid and Massively Parallel Incomplete Verifierscited by 183
  8. 2020NNV: The Neural Network Verification Tool for Deep Neural Networks and Learning-Enabled Cyber-Physical Systemscited by 128
  9. 2021Globally-Robust Neural Networkscited by 106
  10. 2022General Cutting Planes for Bound-Propagation-Based Neural Network Verificationcited by 102
  11. 2024Marabou 2.0: A Versatile Formal Analyzer of Neural Networkscited by 81
  12. 2024Neural Network Verification with Branch-and-Bound for General Nonlinearitiescited by 47
20 more
  1. 2020Exploiting Verified Neural Networks via Floating Point Numerical Errorcited by 35
  2. 2020ReluDiff: Differential Verification of Deep Neural Networkscited by 29
  3. 2025The 6th International Verification of Neural Networks Competition (VNN-COMP 2025): Summary and Resultscited by 26
  4. 2022Open- and Closed-Loop Neural Network Verification using Polynomial Zonotopescited by 24
  5. 2023A DPLL(T) Framework for Verifying Deep Neural Networkscited by 23
  6. 2023Efficient Bound of Lipschitz Constant for Convolutional Layers by Gram Iterationcited by 19
  7. 2024Harnessing Neuron Stability to Improve DNN Verificationcited by 13
  8. 2025Neural Network Verification is a Programming Language Challengecited by 12
  9. 2024Neural Network Verification with PyRATcited by 9
  10. 2024Tight and Efficient Upper Bound on Spectral Norm of Convolutional Layerscited by 7
  11. 2024Set-Based Training for Neural Network Verificationcited by 6
  12. 2025Mixed precision accumulation for neural network inference guided by componentwise forward error analysiscited by 6
  13. 2025Out of the Shadows: Exploring a Latent Space for Neural Network Verificationcited by 6
  14. 2025No Soundness in the Real World: On the Challenges of the Verification of Deployed Neural Networkscited by 5
  15. 2021QNNVerifier: A Tool for Verifying Neural Networks using SMT-Based Model Checkingcited by 4
  16. 2022Getting a-Round Guarantees: Floating-Point Attacks on Certified Robustnesscited by 4
  17. 2024Spectral Norm of Convolutional Layers with Circular and Zero Paddingscited by 4
  18. 2025Floating-Point Neural Network Verification at the Software Levelcited by 2
  19. 2026LipNeXt: Scaling up Lipschitz-based Certified Robustness to Billion-parameter Modelscited by 2
  20. 2025A Formally Verified Robustness Certifier for Neural Networks (Extended Version)cited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025TAO: Tolerance-Aware Optimistic Verification for Floating-Point Neural Networks
  2. 2025Proof-Carrying Verification for ReLU Networks via Rational Certificates ↗
  3. 2026Assessing Large Language Models for Stabilizing Numerical Expressions in Scientific Software
  4. 2025Bridging Efficiency and Safety: Formal Verification of Neural Networks with Early Exits
  5. 2026Beyond the Answer Key: Robustness Evaluation of Large Language Models for Step-Level Mathematical Verification
  6. 2026LipSSM: Structurally Lipschitz-Bounded Cascaded State-Space Model via Metric Transfer between Consecutive SSM Layers
  7. 2026Proof-Carrying Certificates for LLM Pipelines: A Trust-Boundary Architecture
  8. 2026Information-Theoretic Limits of Safety Verification for Self-Improving Systems