arXiv Science⌕ Search

arXiv · 2609.34628

CLAD: Constrained Abstract Domain for Neural Network Verification

Abstract

Neural network verification (NNV) formally verifies that a network satisfies a specified property for all inputs within a defined region. Modern NNV tools employ abstract domains to compute a sound over-approximation of the network's behavior from the given input region, thus the tightness of these abstractions essentially determines efficiency. A long line of increasingly precise domains has been developed, but they all describe the valid input region in the same restrictive way, e.g., an Lp-norm ball. A practical input region is rarely a simple Lp ball, but rather a combination Lp ball with additional constraints. Verifying a network over such a region with existing abstraction produces a loose over-approximation, which results in either failing to verify a property or spurious counterexamples. We introduce Constrained Lagrangian Abstract Domain (CLAD), a new abstract domain that computes a sound over-approximation of neural networks over input regions defined by a combination of convex constraints. CLAD propagates these constraints and tightens bounds over the true feasible region. However, bounding a neuron over the intersection of these constraints has no closed-form solution, so CLAD relaxes each constraint into the objective with a Lagrange multiplier and solves the resulting max-min problem with a projected primal-dual method, alternating a projected gradient step on the input with a multiplier update. CLAD supports any convex constraint with a subgradient, e.g., from automatic differentiation. We evaluate CLAD on 1,944 instances across four convolutional networks with motion-blur structured perturbations with halfspace or L2-ball constraints. On standard unconstrained Linf property, CLAD verifies as many instances as GCPCROWN at a similar runtime. On constrained properties, CLAD verifies 60\% more instances than GCPCROWN on L2-ball properties, and 22% more in total.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Hai Duong, Thanh Le, ThanhVu Nguyen. 2026-09-28. CLAD: Constrained Abstract Domain for Neural Network Verification. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.34628

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Dynamics of Agentic Multi-Hunk Repair

Automated program repair has traditionally focused on single-hunk defects, overlooking multi-hunk bugs that are prevalent in real-world systems. Repairing these bugs requires coordinated edits across multiple, disjoint code regions, posing substantially greater challenges. We present the first systematic study of LLM-driven coding agents (Claude Code, Codex, Gemini-cli, and Qwen Code) on this task. We evaluate these four state-of-the-art agents on 404 multi-hunk bugs from the PolyHunk dataset, yielding 1,616 repair trajectories for large-scale behavioral analysis. We employ fine-grained metrics to assess localization, repair accuracy, regression behavior, and operational dynamics across agents. We find that localization capability varies substantially, with Codex achieving the highest success rate (75.3%) and Qwen Code the lowest (40.4%). Repair accuracy also differs widely, ranging from 26.98% (Qwen Code) to 92.82% (Claude Code), and consistently declines with increasing bug dispersion and complexity (hunk divergence and spatial proximity). High-performing agents (Claude Code and Codex) demonstrate superior semantic consistency, achieving positive average regression reduction, whereas lower-performing agents often introduce new test failures. Notably, agents do not fail fast; failed repairs consume substantially more resources (33%-440% more input tokens) and require longer execution time (35%-330%). Additionally, we developed Maple to provide agents with repository-level context. Empirical results show that Maple improves repair accuracy of Gemini-cli by ~21% through enhanced localization. By analyzing fine-grained metrics and trajectory-level analysis, this study moves beyond accuracy to explain how coding agents localize, reason, and act during multi-hunk repair. Our findings underscore the impact of bug divergence and spatial proximity on multi-hunk repair success for coding agents.

cs.SE↗

Do Newer Models Produce Better Patches? A Non-Functional Quality Study

Repository-level coding benchmarks typically measure progress in model capability by comparing the resolved rates of later and earlier models. However, this focus overlooks whether the non-functional quality of their generated patches has also changed across model generations. This study investigates whether later models produce functionally correct patches with better non-functional characteristics than earlier models on comparable repository-level repair tasks. We conducted two case studies involving four Claude and DeepSeek models on SWE-bench Lite. Using the same SWE-agent functional repair setting, we evaluated the generated patches with CodeQL, CodeScene, CPU time, and peak memory. Our primary analysis compared the models on commonly resolved instances. The static analysis results showed that most CodeQL paired differences were zero and that no CodeQL or CodeScene comparison remained significant after Holm correction. CPU time differences were small and inconsistent across model families, while peak memory usage was slightly higher for the later models under the benchmark test workload, with small absolute differences. Differences in individual CodeQL rules and CodeScene categories varied across model families and did not survive multiple-comparison correction. Overall, later models resolved more instances but showed no consistent improvement in the measured non-functional indicators on tasks solved by both models. Through this study, we hope to encourage a more comprehensive evaluation of models' practical software engineering capabilities.

cs.SE↗

Better Understanding, Better Fixes? A Study of Hallucination in LLM-based Automated Program Repair

Large language models (LLMs) have significantly advanced automated program repair (APR), yet existing evaluations remain largely result-centric and provide limited insight into hallucination during repair. In APR, hallucination may arise not only in final patches but also in the intermediate artifacts that guide patch generation. To address this gap, we perform a multi-layered analysis of hallucination throughout the APR process. Specifically, we characterize hallucination as the production of patches or intermediate artifacts that are not faithfully grounded in the available repair evidence. We examine repair hallucination in final patches and understanding hallucination in intermediate artifacts through three tasks, namely triggering testcase identification, line coverage prediction, and additional testcase generation. We then evaluate three representative LLMs on 832 Defects4J bugs through automatic evaluation and manual analysis. Our results show that both repair and understanding hallucinations remain prevalent. Across models and settings, only 21.0%-55.9% of generated patches pass the developer-written test suite. Moreover, although more accurate intermediate artifacts are generally associated with successful repairs, this relationship does not always hold. Manual analysis of 812 sampled repairs identifies repair hallucinations in 72.7% of cases, including patches that pass all available tests; incorrect causal localization and incorrect repair strategies account for 45.9% and 18.5% of these hallucinations, respectively. Meanwhile, models frequently misidentify triggering testcases, mispredict line coverage involving branching control flow, and generate additional testcases with missing bug-triggering conditions or incorrect expected behavior.

cs.SE↗