Efficient Incremental Verification of Neural Networks Guided by Counterexample Potentiality

Incremental verification is an emerging neural network verification approach that aims to accelerate the verification of a neural network N * by reusing the existing verification result (called a template ) of a similar neural network N . To date, the state-of-the-art incremental verification approach leverages the problem splitting history produced by branch and bound ( BaB in verification of N , to select only a part of the sub-problems for verification of N * , thus more efficient than verifying N * from scratch. While this approach identifies whether each sub-problem should be re-assessed, it neglects the information of how necessary each sub-problem should be re-assessed, in the sense that the sub-problems that are more likely to contain counterexamples should be prioritized, in order to terminate the verification process as soon as a counterexample is detected. To bridge this gap, we first define a counterexample potentiality order over different sub-problems based on the template, and then we propose Olive , an incremental verification approach that explores the sub-problems of verifying N * orderly guided by counterexample potentiality. Specifically, Olive has two variants, including Olive g , a greedy strategy that always prefers to exploit the sub-problems that are more likely to contain counterexamples, and Olive b , a balanced strategy that also explores the sub-problems that are less likely, in case the template is not sufficiently precise. We experimentally evaluate the efficiency of Olive on 1445 verification problem instances derived from 15 neural networks spanning over two datasets MNIST and CIFAR-10. Our evaluation demonstrates significant performance advantages of Olive over state-of-the-art classic verification and incremental approaches. In particular, Olive shows evident superiority on the problem instances that contain counterexamples, and performs as well as Ivan on the certified problem instances.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages
Published
2025-04-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3720417
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.96
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Efficient Incremental Verification of Neural Networks Guided by Counterexample Potentiality

Guanqin Zhang, Shiping Chen, Yulei Sui, Jianjun Zhao et al.
2 citations
Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages
Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
4.96
article

Efficient Incremental Verification of Neural Networks Guided by Counterexample Potentiality

Guanqin Zhang, Shiping Chen, Yulei Sui, Jianjun Zhao, H. M. N. Dilum Bandara, Zhenya Zhang
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Incremental verification is an emerging neural network verification approach that aims to accelerate the verification of a neural network N * by reusing the existing verification result (called a template ) of a similar neural network N . To date, the state-of-the-art incremental verification approach leverages the problem splitting history produced by branch and bound ( BaB in verification of N , to select only a part of the sub-problems for verification of N * , thus more efficient than verifying N * from scratch. While this approach identifies whether each sub-problem should be re-assessed, it neglects the information of how necessary each sub-problem should be re-assessed, in the sense that the sub-problems that are more likely to contain counterexamples should be prioritized, in order to terminate the verification process as soon as a counterexample is detected. To bridge this gap, we first define a counterexample potentiality order over different sub-problems based on the template, and then we propose Olive , an incremental verification approach that explores the sub-problems of verifying N * orderly guided by counterexample potentiality. Specifically, Olive has two variants, including Olive g , a greedy strategy that always prefers to exploit the sub-problems that are more likely to contain counterexamples, and Olive b , a balanced strategy that also explores the sub-problems that are less likely, in case the template is not sufficiently precise. We experimentally evaluate the efficiency of Olive on 1445 verification problem instances derived from 15 neural networks spanning over two datasets MNIST and CIFAR-10. Our evaluation demonstrates significant performance advantages of Olive over state-of-the-art classic verification and incremental approaches. In particular, Olive shows evident superiority on the problem instances that contain counterexamples, and performs as well as Ivan on the certified problem instances.

Proceedings of the ACM on Programming LanguagesVol. 9(OOPSLA1)
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU), Kyushu University (JP), UNSW Sydney (AU), Data61 (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
4.96
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.