Reconciling Safety Measurement and Dynamic Assurance

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.19641v1
• Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 02:48:00 GMT
• Title: Reconciling Safety Measurement and Dynamic Assurance
• Authors: Ewen Denney, Ganesh Pai,
• Abstract summary: We propose a new framework to facilitate dynamic assurance within a safety case approach. The focus is mainly on the safety architecture, whose underlying risk assessment model gives the concrete link from safety measurement to operational risk.
• Score: 1.6574413179773757
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: We propose a new framework to facilitate dynamic assurance within a safety case approach by associating safety performance measurement with the core assurance artifacts of a safety case. The focus is mainly on the safety architecture, whose underlying risk assessment model gives the concrete link from safety measurement to operational risk. Using an aviation domain example of autonomous taxiing, we describe our approach to derive safety indicators and revise the risk assessment based on safety measurement. We then outline a notion of consistency between a collection of safety indicators and the safety case, as a formal basis for implementing the proposed framework in our tool, AdvoCATE.

Related papers

• Shape it Up! Restoring LLM Safety during Finetuning [66.46166656543761]
  Finetuning large language models (LLMs) enables user-specific customization but introduces critical safety risks.<n>We propose dynamic safety shaping (DSS), a framework that uses fine-grained safety signals to reinforce learning from safe segments of a response while suppressing unsafe content.<n>We present STAR-DSS, guided by STAR scores, that robustly mitigates finetuning risks and delivers substantial safety improvements across diverse threats, datasets, and model families.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T18:05:16Z)
• SafeKey: Amplifying Aha-Moment Insights for Safety Reasoning [76.56522719330911]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) introduce a new generation paradigm of explicitly reasoning before answering.<n>LRMs pose great safety risks against harmful queries and adversarial attacks.<n>We propose SafeKey to better activate the safety aha moment in the key sentence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T03:46:03Z)
• TraCeS: Trajectory Based Credit Assignment From Sparse Safety Feedback [15.904640266226023]
  In safe reinforcement learning (RL), auxiliary safety costs are used to align the agent to safe decision making. In practice, safety constraints, including cost functions and budgets, are unknown or hard to specify. We address a general setting where the true safety definition is unknown, and has to be learned from sparsely labeled data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-17T01:11:08Z)
• Probabilistic Shielding for Safe Reinforcement Learning [51.35559820893218]
  In real-life scenarios, a Reinforcement Learning (RL) agent must often also behave in a safe manner, including at training time. We present a new, scalable method, which enjoys strict formal guarantees for Safe RL. We show that our approach provides a strict formal safety guarantee that the agent stays safe at training and test time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-09T17:54:33Z)
• Vulnerability Mitigation for Safety-Aligned Language Models via Debiasing [12.986006070964772]
  Safety alignment is an essential research topic for real-world AI applications. Our study first identified the difficulty of eliminating such vulnerabilities without sacrificing the model's helpfulness. Our method could enhance the model's helpfulness while maintaining safety, thus improving the trade-off-front.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T09:31:54Z)
• Cross-Modality Safety Alignment [73.8765529028288]
  We introduce a novel safety alignment challenge called Safe Inputs but Unsafe Output (SIUO) to evaluate cross-modality safety alignment. To empirically investigate this problem, we developed the SIUO, a cross-modality benchmark encompassing 9 critical safety domains, such as self-harm, illegal activities, and privacy violations. Our findings reveal substantial safety vulnerabilities in both closed- and open-source LVLMs, underscoring the inadequacy of current models to reliably interpret and respond to complex, real-world scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-21T16:14:15Z)
• Safe Reinforcement Learning with Learned Non-Markovian Safety Constraints [15.904640266226023]
  We design a safety model that performs credit assignment to assess contributions of partial state-action trajectories on safety. We derive an effective algorithm for optimizing a safe policy using the learned safety model. We devise a method to dynamically adapt the tradeoff coefficient between safety reward and safety compliance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-05T17:27:22Z)
• The Art of Defending: A Systematic Evaluation and Analysis of LLM Defense Strategies on Safety and Over-Defensiveness [56.174255970895466]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) play an increasingly pivotal role in natural language processing applications. This paper presents Safety and Over-Defensiveness Evaluation (SODE) benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-30T17:37:06Z)
• Safeguarded Progress in Reinforcement Learning: Safe Bayesian Exploration for Control Policy Synthesis [63.532413807686524]
  This paper addresses the problem of maintaining safety during training in Reinforcement Learning (RL) We propose a new architecture that handles the trade-off between efficient progress and safety during exploration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-18T16:09:43Z)
• A Counterfactual Safety Margin Perspective on the Scoring of Autonomous Vehicles' Riskiness [52.27309191283943]
  This paper presents a data-driven framework for assessing the risk of different AVs' behaviors. We propose the notion of counterfactual safety margin, which represents the minimum deviation from nominal behavior that could cause a collision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-02T09:48:08Z)
• Towards Safer Generative Language Models: A Survey on Safety Risks, Evaluations, and Improvements [76.80453043969209]
  This survey presents a framework for safety research pertaining to large models. We begin by introducing safety issues of wide concern, then delve into safety evaluation methods for large models. We explore the strategies for enhancing large model safety from training to deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-18T09:32:55Z)
• Safety Analysis of Autonomous Driving Systems Based on Model Learning [16.38592243376647]
  We present a practical verification method for safety analysis of the autonomous driving system (ADS) The main idea is to build a surrogate model that quantitatively depicts the behaviour of an ADS in the specified traffic scenario. We demonstrate the utility of the proposed approach by evaluating safety properties on the state-of-the-art ADS in literature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-23T06:52:40Z)
• Safe Reinforcement Learning via Confidence-Based Filters [78.39359694273575]
  We develop a control-theoretic approach for certifying state safety constraints for nominal policies learned via standard reinforcement learning techniques. We provide formal safety guarantees, and empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-04T11:43:23Z)
• Fail-Safe Adversarial Generative Imitation Learning [9.594432031144716]
  We propose a safety layer that enables a closed-form probability density/gradient of the safe generative continuous policy, end-to-end generative adversarial training, and worst-case safety guarantees. The safety layer maps all actions into a set of safe actions, and uses the change-of-variables formula plus additivity of measures for the density. In an experiment on real-world driver interaction data, we empirically demonstrate tractability, safety and imitation performance of our approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-03T13:03:06Z)
• A causal model of safety assurance for machine learning [0.45687771576879593]
  This paper proposes a framework based on a causal model of safety upon which effective safety assurance cases for ML-based applications can be built. The paper defines four categories of safety case evidence and a structured analysis approach within which these evidences can be effectively combined.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-14T13:54:17Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.