# Veriphi: Attack-Guided Neural Network Verification with Dataset-Dependent Training Methods

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.18454 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.18454/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 11 of its 17 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Jun 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1412.6572/) (2014)
- [Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.06083/) (2017)
- [Reluplex: An Efficient SMT Solver for Verifying Deep Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1702.01135/) (2017)
- [Provable defenses against adversarial examples via the convex outer adversarial polytope](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.00851/) (2017)
- [Overfitting in adversarially robust deep learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.11569/) (2020)
- [Efficient Neural Network Robustness Certification with General Activation Functions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.00866/) (2018)
- [On the Effectiveness of Interval Bound Propagation for Training Verifiably Robust Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.12715/) (2018)
- [Beta-CROWN: Efficient Bound Propagation with Per-neuron Split Constraints for Complete and Incomplete Neural Network Robustness Verification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.06624/) (2021)
- [Towards Stable and Efficient Training of Verifiably Robust Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.06316/) (2019)
- [Fast and Complete: Enabling Complete Neural Network Verification with Rapid and Massively Parallel Incomplete Verifiers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.13824/) (2020)
- [Formal Security Analysis of Neural Networks using Symbolic Intervals](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.10829/) (2018)

## Abstract (arXiv)

We present Veriphi, a GPU-accelerated neural network verification system that combines fast adversarial attacks with formal bound certification using alpha,beta-CROWN methods. Through systematic experiments on MNIST and CIFAR-10 using three training methodologies (standard, adversarial, certified), we demonstrate that training method effectiveness is fundamentally dataset-dependent. Interval Bound Propagation (IBP) achieves 78% certified accuracy on simple MNIST (784 dimensions) but provides negligible certification performance on the more complex CIFAR-10 dataset, where PGD adversarial training dominates with 94% certification at small perturbations. We achieve 5x verification speedup through attack-guided falsification and scale our approach to production-size models (105.8M parameters) for real-world aerospace logistics optimization. Our results challenge the assumption that certified training universally outperforms adversarial training, showing context matters critically for verification strategy selection.