Pith. sign in

Finding Safety Violations of AI-Enabled Control Systems through the Lens of Synthesized Proxy Programs

1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.

1 Pith paper citing it
abstract

Given the increasing adoption of modern AI-enabled control systems, ensuring their safety and reliability has become a critical task in software testing. One prevalent approach to testing control systems is falsification, which aims to find an input signal that causes the control system to violate a formal safety specification using optimization algorithms. However, applying falsification to AI-enabled control systems poses two significant challenges: (1)~it requires the system to execute numerous candidate test inputs, which can be time-consuming, particularly for systems with AI models that have many parameters, and (2)~multiple safety requirements are typically defined as a conjunctive specification, which is difficult for existing falsification approaches to comprehensively cover. This paper introduces Synthify, a falsification framework tailored for AI-enabled control systems. Our approach performs falsification in a two-phase process. At the start, Synthify synthesizes a program that implements one or a few linear controllers to serve as a proxy for the AI controller. This proxy program mimics the AI controller's functionality but is computationally more efficient. Then, Synthify employs the $\epsilon$-greedy strategy to sample a promising sub-specification from the conjunctive safety specification. It then uses a Simulated Annealing-based falsification algorithm to find violations of the sampled sub-specification for the control system. To evaluate Synthify, we compare it to PSY-TaLiRo, a state-of-the-art and industrial-strength falsification tool, on 8 publicly available control systems. On average, Synthify achieves a 83.5% higher success rate in falsification compared to PSY-TaLiRo with the same budget of falsification trials. The safety violations found by Synthify are also more diverse than those found by PSY-TaLiRo, covering 137.7% more sub-specifications.

citation-role summary

background 1

citation-polarity summary

fields

cs.SE 1

years

2025 1

verdicts

CONDITIONAL 1

roles

background 1

polarities

unclear 1

representative citing papers

MoDitector: Module-Directed Testing for Autonomous Driving Systems

cs.SE · 2025-02-12 · conditional · novelty 6.0

MoDitector generates collision scenarios that are caused by errors in a user-specified ADS module, reporting 55.3, 75.3, 71.7, and 14.3 module-induced critical scenarios for perception, prediction, planning, and control, versus at most 18.3, 25.3, 34.3, and 7.0 for baselines.

citing papers explorer

Showing 1 of 1 citing paper.

  • MoDitector: Module-Directed Testing for Autonomous Driving Systems cs.SE · 2025-02-12 · conditional · none · ref 39 · internal anchor

    MoDitector generates collision scenarios that are caused by errors in a user-specified ADS module, reporting 55.3, 75.3, 71.7, and 14.3 module-induced critical scenarios for perception, prediction, planning, and control, versus at most 18.3, 25.3, 34.3, and 7.0 for baselines.