MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4301181330 · doi:10.1007/s10009-022-00684-w

Analysis of recurrent neural networks via property-directed verification of surrogate models

2022· article· en· W4301181330 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCampus FranceUniversität zu LübeckDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftDeutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
KeywordsRecurrent neural networkProperty (philosophy)Computer scienceRobustness (evolution)AutomatonCounterexampleArtificial intelligenceModel checkingArtificial neural networkAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents a property-directed approach to verifying recurrent neural networks (RNNs). To this end, we learn a deterministic finite automaton as a surrogate model from a given RNN using active automata learning. This model may then be analyzed using model checking as a verification technique. The term property-directed reflects the idea that our procedure is guided and controlled by the given property rather than performing the two steps separately. We show that this not only allows us to discover small counterexamples fast, but also to generalize them by pumping toward faulty flows hinting at the underlying error in the RNN. We also show that our method can be efficiently used for adversarial robustness certification of RNNs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it