This study shows that template subsumption rates can vary widely across scenarios, and presents FastCert, a novel technique for automatically distributing templates across neural network layers to increase performance impact, eschewing templates entirely if they are unlikely to produce a speedup.
Abstract
Robustness verification of neural networks is increasingly important, due to their use in many critical domains. In certain scenarios, proof sharing has been shown to accelerate incomplete verification techniques by reusing intermediate-layer abstract states, or templates, across queries. However, questions remain as to the robustness of template-based acceleration across varying network architectures, properties, datasets, and training methods. In this work, we perform a systematic study of the effectiveness of template-based acceleration and its limits. Our study shows that template subsumption rates can vary widely across scenarios. We present a novel metric of jointly stable neurons to explain this variation, showing that in some cases template-based techniques are very unlikely to provide any speedup. Then, we present FastCert, a novel technique for automatically distributing templates across neural network layers to increase performance impact, eschewing templates entirely if they are unlikely to produce a speedup. Across a large set of covering-design based $L_0$-verification tasks, FastCert achieved an average speedup of 1.13x over an extant template-based reuse technique.
Verification of neural networks against relational specifications, such as global robustness, is crucial for safety-critical applications of cyber-physical systems (CPS), given their increasing adoption of AI components. Compared to simple trace properties (e.g., local robustness), verifying relational specifications requires reasoning about the relationship between multiple network inferences, which brings significant technical challenges. Existing research has explored abstraction techniques based on sound and convex over-approximation of neural network outputs; however, since these approaches are inherently incomplete and may raise false alarms, they further underscore the need of effective abstraction refinement. In this paper, we propose a branch-and-bound (BaB) framework to mitigate the issue, which iteratively splits the problem until all sub-problems are verified. Specifically, our BaB framework features splitting of relational neurons rather than individual neurons as prior works do, and as the core of our technique, we devise a relational neuron selection strategy based on the dual formulation of the verification problem, which allows us to efficiently select the (most likely) optimal relational neuron that maximizes the refinement brought by problem splitting. We evaluate SaBRe on 817 verification problems across ACAS Xu, MNIST-F, MNIST-C, CIFAR and GTSRB. The results show that SaBRe outperforms different baseline approaches, in terms of the number of solved instances and verification efficiency, which demonstrates the effectiveness of our proposed techniques.
Kota Fukuda, Zhenya Zhang, Guanqin Zhang et al.· 0 citations
Neural networks are increasingly used to support decision-making. To verify their reliability and adaptability, researchers and practitioners have proposed a variety of tools and methods for tasks such as NN code verification, refactoring, and migration. These tools play a crucial role in guaranteeing both the correctness and maintainability of neural network architectures, helping to prevent implementation errors, simplify model updates, and ensure that complex networks can be reliably extended and reused. Yet, assessing their effectiveness remains challenging due to the lack of publicly available diverse datasets of neural networks that would allow systematic evaluation. To address this gap, we leverage large language models (LLMs) to automatically generate a dataset of neural networks that can serve as a benchmark for validation. The dataset is designed to cover diverse layer types and to handle multiple input data types and tasks. In total, 608 samples are generated, each conforming to a set of precise design choices. To further ensure their consistency, we validate the correctness of the generated networks using static analysis and symbolic tracing. We make the dataset publicly available to support the community in advancing research on neural network reliability and adaptability.
Neural network repair aims to fix the ‘bugs’ of neural networks by modifying the model's architecture or parameters. However, due to the data-driven nature of neural networks, it is difficult to explain the relationship between internal neurons and erroneous behaviors, making further repair challenging. While several work exists to identify responsible neurons based on gradient or causality analysis, their effectiveness heavily rely on the quality of available ‘bugged’ data and multiple heuristics. Consequently, achieving precise localization and targeted repair remains a significant challenge, particularly in data-scarce scenarios. In this work, we address the issue utilizing the power of formal verification. Specifically, we propose VeRe, a verification-guided repair framework that leverages linear relaxation to precisely and efficiently estimate the repair significance of neurons. Based on the linear bounds, VeRe synthesizes ideal intervals that provide sound guarantees for correct behaviors, thereby facilitating surgical and targeted adjustments of neuron parameters to rectify faulty behaviors. We evaluated VeRe on various repair tasks, and results show that VeRe consistently achieves superior repair success rates and high generalization with negligible impact on original performance. Notably, VeRe exhibits a significantly lower dependency on repair data than existing baselines, effectively removing faulty behaviors even in data-restricted scenarios.
Jianan Ma, Wei Chen, Pengfei Yang et al.· ACM Transactions on Software...· 0 citations
State-of-the-art neural network verifiers use the branch-and-bound procedure as their core solving mechanism. We introduce an inprocessing framework for neural network verification driven by the lookahead procedure. Under this framework, lookahead derives new lemmas over the phases of unstable ReLUs, which are collected into an implication graph that is used to prune the search space and vivify boolean cuts. We instantiate the framework in two state-of-the-art verifiers, Marabou and $\alpha$-$\beta$-CROWN, and demonstrate that it improves performance in both, proving up to 34% more instances unsatisfiable.
Reliable verifiable data has become a key driver of capability gains in modern language models, enabling stable reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards and effective distillation that transfers competence across math, coding, and agentic tasks. Yet constructing generalizable synthetic verifiable data remains difficult due to hallucination-prone generation, and weak or trivial verification artifacts that fail to separate strong from weak solutions. Existing approaches often rely on task-specific heuristics or post-hoc filters that do not transfer across domains and lack a principled, universal evaluator of verifiability. In this work, we introduce an evolutionary, task-agnostic, strategy-guided, executably-checkable data synthesis framework that, from minimal seed supervision, jointly synthesizes problems, diverse candidate solutions, and verification artifacts, and iteratively discovers strategies via a consistency-based evaluator that enforces agreement be-tween human-annotated and strategy-induced checks. This pipeline upgrades filtering into principled synthesis: it reliably assembles coherent, verifiable training instances and generalizes without domain-specific rules. Our experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach under both RLVR and model distillation training paradigms. The re-sults show that training with our synthesized data yields significant improvements on both the LiveCodeBench and AgentBench-OS tasks, highlighting the robust generalization of our framework 1 .
He Du, Bowen Li, Aijun Yang et al.· Annual Meeting of the Associ...· 0 citations
Despite ever-increasing sophistication in language model (LM) pre- and post-training pipelines, many important failures persist: models overcondition on user framing ("sycophancy"), exhibit incomplete logical generalization, and produce confident but incorrect responses. We argue that these failures arise from a modeling assumption permeating all aspects of the pipeline: that behavior can be specified and evaluated independently on single-output pairs. Many model failures are difficult, if not impossible, to detect without reasoning about relationships between a model's responses across inputs. In this position paper, we propose self-consistency as a framework for understanding these failures. We first observe that a wide variety of techniques designed to improve specific aspects of LM behavior-targeting properties as diverse as adversarial robustness and factual coherence-can be understood as special cases of a common"consistency optimization"procedure and addressed with a standard set of optimization tools. We next outline a set of new model properties that could be achieved by optimizing for consistency, and conclude with a discussion of what it would mean to develop generally consistent LMs, including the capabilities they would enable and the objections they raise.
Itamar Hagay Pres, Belinda Z. Li, L. Ruis et al.· 1 citation