Fuzzing the brain: automated stress testing for the safety of ML-driven neurostimulation

<i>Objective.</i>Machine learning (ML) models are increasingly used to generate electrical stimulation patterns in neuroprosthetic devices such as visual prostheses. While these models promise precise and personalized control, they also introduce new safety risks when model outputs are delivered directly to neural tissue. We propose a systematic, quantitative approach to detect and characterize unsafe stimulation patterns in ML-driven neurostimulation systems.<i>Approach.</i>We adapt an automated software testing technique known as coverage-guided fuzzing to the domain of neural stimulation. Here, fuzzing performs stress testing by perturbing model inputs and tracking whether resulting stimulation violates biophysical limits on charge density, instantaneous current, or electrode co-activation. The framework treats encoders as black boxes and steers exploration with coverage metrics that quantify how broadly test cases span the space of possible outputs and violation types.<i>Main results.</i>Applied to deep stimulus encoders for the retina and cortex, the method systematically reveals diverse stimulation regimes that exceed established safety limits. Two violation-output coverage metrics identify the highest number and diversity of unsafe outputs, enabling interpretable comparisons across architectures and training strategies.<i>Significance.</i>Violation-focused fuzzing reframes safety assessment as an empirical, reproducible process. By transforming safety from a training heuristic into a measurable property of the deployed model, it establishes a foundation for evidence-based benchmarking, regulatory readiness, and ethical assurance in next-generation neural interfaces.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Neural Engineering
Published
2026-02-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ae4927
Primary Topic
Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Fuzzing the brain: automated stress testing for the safety of ML-driven neurostimulation

Tevfik Bultan, Mara Downing, Jacob Granley, Matthew Peng et al.
Journal of Neural Engineering
Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
article

Fuzzing the brain: automated stress testing for the safety of ML-driven neurostimulation

Tevfik Bultan, Mara Downing, Jacob Granley, Matthew Peng, Michael Beyeler
article en

Abstract

<i>Objective.</i>Machine learning (ML) models are increasingly used to generate electrical stimulation patterns in neuroprosthetic devices such as visual prostheses. While these models promise precise and personalized control, they also introduce new safety risks when model outputs are delivered directly to neural tissue. We propose a systematic, quantitative approach to detect and characterize unsafe stimulation patterns in ML-driven neurostimulation systems.<i>Approach.</i>We adapt an automated software testing technique known as coverage-guided fuzzing to the domain of neural stimulation. Here, fuzzing performs stress testing by perturbing model inputs and tracking whether resulting stimulation violates biophysical limits on charge density, instantaneous current, or electrode co-activation. The framework treats encoders as black boxes and steers exploration with coverage metrics that quantify how broadly test cases span the space of possible outputs and violation types.<i>Main results.</i>Applied to deep stimulus encoders for the retina and cortex, the method systematically reveals diverse stimulation regimes that exceed established safety limits. Two violation-output coverage metrics identify the highest number and diversity of unsafe outputs, enabling interpretable comparisons across architectures and training strategies.<i>Significance.</i>Violation-focused fuzzing reframes safety assessment as an empirical, reproducible process. By transforming safety from a training heuristic into a measurable property of the deployed model, it establishes a foundation for evidence-based benchmarking, regulatory readiness, and ethical assurance in next-generation neural interfaces.

Journal of Neural EngineeringVol. 23(2)
University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, U.S. National Library of Medicine
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 47%
Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
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.