On the Formal Limits of Alignment Verification

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.08761v1
• Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2026 23:03:21 GMT
• Title: On the Formal Limits of Alignment Verification
• Abstract summary: A foundational question for AI safety is whether alignment can be formally certified.<n>We prove that no verification procedure can simultaneously satisfy three properties: soundness (no misaligned system is certified), generality (verification runs in time), and tractability.<n>The result follows from three independent barriers: the computational complexity of full-domain neural network verification, the non-identifiability of internal goal structure from behavioral observation, and the limits of finite evidence for properties defined over infinite domains.
• Score: 0.24049560288708582
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: The goal of AI alignment is to ensure that an AI system reliably pursues intended objectives. A foundational question for AI safety is whether alignment can be formally certified: whether there exists a procedure that can guarantee that a given system satisfies an alignment specification. This paper studies the nature of alignment verification. We prove that no verification procedure can simultaneously satisfy three properties: soundness (no misaligned system is certified), generality (verification holds over the full input domain), and tractability (verification runs in polynomial time). Each pair of properties is achievable, but all three cannot hold simultaneously. Relaxing any one property restores the corresponding possibility, indicating that practical bounded or probabilistic assurance remains viable. The result follows from three independent barriers: the computational complexity of full-domain neural network verification, the non-identifiability of internal goal structure from behavioral observation, and the limits of finite evidence for properties defined over infinite domains. The trilemma establishes the limits of alignment certification and characterizes the regimes in which meaningful guarantees remain possible.

Related papers

• Towards Trustworthy Embodied Intelligence: A Systems Framework and Graded Trustworthiness Levels [53.63220028820581]
  Embodied intelligence integrates learned perception and decision making with real-time computation, control, and physical interaction.<n>We define trustworthy embodied intelligence as the sustained capacity to execute specified tasks reliably.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-28T17:50:44Z)
• The Undecidability of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) Alignment [0.0]
  This article establishes the foundational mathematical limits of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) safety.<n>We formalize this boundary through two central impossibility results: the Unverifiability Theorem of Alignment and the Theorem of Finite Structural Unverifiability of AGI Alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-26T22:51:16Z)
• Making Embodied AI Reliable: A Community Agenda from Testing to Formal Verification [38.209854965937495]
  Embodied AI systems are increasingly deployed in open-world environments.<n>This article argues that reliability in embodied AI is inherently a lifecycle assurance problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-02T12:58:40Z)
• Value Functions as Supermartingale Certificates [48.922124609307566]
  We show that under an appropriate reward, the value function associated to a policy that almost surely satisfies an $$-regular property encodes a Streett supermartingale certificate for that specification.<n>Our results, validated experimentally on finite Markov decision processes, hold for finite, countably infinite, and continuous state spaces, suggesting a principled route to certificate synthesis via RL.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-29T16:39:02Z)
• Uncertainty-DTW for Sequences and Visual Tokens [43.798398689900075]
  We introduce uncertainty-aware alignment, a probabilistic framework that models correspondences with heteroscedastic uncertainty and performs structured matching along alignment paths.<n>We generalize this framework from temporal sequences to tokenized visual representations, enabling structured matching over sets of visual tokens.<n>These findings establish uncertainty-aware alignment as a general, robust, and interpretable framework for learning from structured data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-24T14:49:43Z)
• Monitoring Data-aware Temporal Properties (Extended Version) [56.386411908764494]
  We consider anticipatory monitoring of linear-time properties enriched with an arbitrary SMT theory over finite traces.<n>Anticipatory monitoring in this setting is highly challenging, as the monitoring state depends on both the trace prefix seen so far and all its possible finite continuations.<n>We present and formally prove the correctness of a novel foundational framework for monitoring properties in an expressive fragment offMT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-14T10:23:11Z)
• Incompleteness of AI Safety Verification via Kolmogorov Complexity [0.20305676256390928]
  We show that limitations of verification arise from intrinsic information-theoretic limits.<n>No finite formal verifier can certify all policy-compliant instances of arbitrarily high complexity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-06T17:26:09Z)
• Verification of Robust Properties for Access Control Policies [51.736723807086385]
  Existing methods for verifying access control policies require the policy to be complete and fully determined before verification can proceed.<n>We introduce robust property verification: the problem of determining what a policy's structure commits it to regardless of how pending decisions are resolved and regardless of subsequent extension.<n>We show that despite quantifying universally over all possible policy extensions the judgment reduces to proof search in a second-order logic programming language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-13T17:14:38Z)
• Upholding Epistemic Agency: A Brouwerian Assertibility Constraint for Responsible AI [0.0]
  I propose a Brouwer-inspired assertibility constraint for responsible AI.<n>In high-stakes domains, systems may assert or deny claims only if they can provide a publicly inspectable and contestable certificate of entitlement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-04T12:14:21Z)
• Formal Mechanistic Interpretability: Automated Circuit Discovery with Provable Guarantees [5.156069978876762]
  We propose a suite of automated algorithms that yield circuits with provable guarantees.<n>We focus on three types of guarantees: *input domain robustness*, *robust patching*, and *minimality*.<n>We uncover a diverse set of novel theoretical connections among these three families of guarantees, with critical implications for the convergence of our algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-18T19:41:01Z)
• Alignment Verifiability in Large Language Models: Normative Indistinguishability under Behavioral Evaluation [0.0]
  We study alignment evaluation through the lens of statistical identifiability under partial observability.<n>We formalize the Alignment Verifiability Problem and introduce Normative Indistinguishability.<n>Our results show that behavioral benchmarks provide necessary but insufficient evidence for latent alignment under evaluation awareness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-05T13:40:56Z)
• Agentic Uncertainty Quantification [76.94013626702183]
  We propose a unified Dual-Process Agentic UQ (AUQ) framework that transforms verbalized uncertainty into active, bi-directional control signals.<n>Our architecture comprises two complementary mechanisms: System 1 (Uncertainty-Aware Memory, UAM), which implicitly propagates verbalized confidence and semantic explanations to prevent blind decision-making; and System 2 (Uncertainty-Aware Reflection, UAR), which utilizes these explanations as rational cues to trigger targeted inference-time resolution only when necessary.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-22T07:16:26Z)
• Making LLMs Reliable When It Matters Most: A Five-Layer Architecture for High-Stakes Decisions [51.56484100374058]
  Current large language models (LLMs) excel in verifiable domains where outputs can be checked before action but prove less reliable for high-stakes strategic decisions with uncertain outcomes.<n>This gap, driven by mutually cognitive biases in both humans and artificial intelligence (AI) systems, threatens the defensibility of valuations and sustainability of investments in the sector.<n>This report describes a framework emerging from systematic qualitative assessment across 7 frontier-grade LLMs and 3 market-facing venture vignettes under time pressure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-10T22:24:21Z)
• SONA: Learning Conditional, Unconditional, and Mismatching-Aware Discriminator [54.562217603802075]
  We introduce Sum of Naturalness and Alignment (SONA), which employs separate projections for naturalness (authenticity) and alignment in the final layer with an inductive bias.<n>Experiments on class-conditional generation tasks show thatSONA achieves superior sample quality and conditional alignment compared to state-of-the-art methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-06T08:26:06Z)
• Core Safety Values for Provably Corrigible Agents [2.6451153531057985]
  We introduce the first implementable framework for corrigibility, with provable guarantees in multi-step, partially observed environments.<n>Our framework replaces a single reward with five *structurally separate* utility heads.<n>For open-ended settings where adversaries can modify the agent, we prove that deciding whether an arbitrary post-hack agent will ever violate corrigibility is undecidable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-28T16:19:25Z)
• Beyond 'Aha!': Toward Systematic Meta-Abilities Alignment in Large Reasoning Models [86.88657425848547]
  Large reasoning models (LRMs) already possess a latent capacity for long chain-of-thought reasoning.<n>We explicitly align models with three meta-abilities: deduction, induction, and abduction, using automatically generated, self-verifiable tasks.<n>Our three stage-pipeline individual alignment, parameter-space merging, and domain-specific reinforcement learning, boosts performance by over 10% relative to instruction-tuned baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-15T17:58:33Z)
• Enumerating Safe Regions in Deep Neural Networks with Provable Probabilistic Guarantees [86.1362094580439]
  We introduce the AllDNN-Verification problem: given a safety property and a DNN, enumerate the set of all the regions of the property input domain which are safe. Due to the #P-hardness of the problem, we propose an efficient approximation method called epsilon-ProVe. Our approach exploits a controllable underestimation of the output reachable sets obtained via statistical prediction of tolerance limits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-18T22:30:35Z)
• Evidential Turing Processes [11.021440340896786]
  We introduce an original combination of evidential deep learning, neural processes, and neural Turing machines. We observe our method on three image classification benchmarks and two neural net architectures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-02T15:09:20Z)

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.