Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Taylor J. Carpenter

dblp:229/8553 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2021
0000-0002-2397-871XORCID · verified

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Theory of computation · 2 · 1 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Program verification · 100%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100%
Network and information security
1 paper
Cyber-physical and IoT security · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program verification › neural network verification
neural network controller verification
0.512021
Verisig 2.0: Verification of Neural Network Controllers Using Taylor Model Preconditioning · CAV (1) 2021
Automated reasoning and model checking
reachability
0.512021
Verisig 2.0: Verification of Neural Network Controllers Using Taylor Model Preconditioning · CAV (1) 2021

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

taylor model preconditioning · 1.5shrink wrapping · 1.5reachability analysis · 1.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2021 Verisig 2.0: Verification of Neural Network Controllers Using Taylor Model Preconditioning
abstract
Abstract This paper presents Verisig 2.0, a verification tool for closed-loop systems with neural network (NN) controllers. We focus on NNs with tanh/sigmoid activations and develop a Taylor-model-based reachability algorithm through Taylor model preconditioning and shrink wrapping. Furthermore, we provide a parallelized implementation that allows Verisig 2.0 to efficiently handle larger NNs than existing tools can. We provide an extensive evaluation over 10 benchmarks and compare Verisig 2.0 against three state-of-the-art verification tools. We show that Verisig 2.0 is both more accurate and faster, achieving speed-ups of up to 21x and 268x against different tools, respectively.
Radoslav Ivanov, Taylor J. Carpenter, James Weimer, Rajeev Alur, George J. Pappas, Insup Lee 0001
CAV (1)2
2021 Verifying the Safety of Autonomous Systems with Neural Network Controllers
abstract
This article addresses the problem of verifying the safety of autonomous systems with neural network (NN) controllers. We focus on NNs with sigmoid/tanh activations and use the fact that the sigmoid/tanh is the solution to a quadratic differential equation. This allows us to convert the NN into an equivalent hybrid system and cast the problem as a hybrid system verification problem, which can be solved by existing tools. Furthermore, we improve the scalability of the proposed method by approximating the sigmoid with a Taylor series with worst-case error bounds. Finally, we provide an evaluation over four benchmarks, including comparisons with alternative approaches based on mixed integer linear programming as well as on star sets.
Radoslav Ivanov, Taylor J. Carpenter, James Weimer, Rajeev Alur, George J. Pappas, Insup Lee 0001
ACM Trans. Embed. Comput. Syst.2
2020 Case study: verifying the safety of an autonomous racing car with a neural network controller
abstract
This paper describes a verification case study on an autonomous racing car with a neural network (NN) controller. Although several verification approaches have been recently proposed, they have only been evaluated on low-dimensional systems or systems with constrained environments. To explore the limits of existing approaches, we present a challenging benchmark in which the NN takes raw LiDAR measurements as input and outputs steering for the car. We train a dozen NNs using reinforcement learning (RL) and show that the state of the art in verification can handle systems with around 40 LiDAR rays. Furthermore, we perform real experiments to investigate the benefits and limitations of verification with respect to the sim2real gap, i.e., the difference between a system's modeled and real performance. We identify cases, similar to the modeled environment, in which verification is strongly correlated with safe behavior. Finally, we illustrate LiDAR fault patterns that can be used to develop robust and safe RL algorithms.
Radoslav Ivanov, Taylor J. Carpenter, James Weimer, Rajeev Alur, George J. Pappas, Insup Lee 0001
HSCC2