Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Samuel Teuber

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

2 papers
1 author row

Possible papers

2

AAAI Conference 2024 Conference Paper

An Information-Flow Perspective on Algorithmic Fairness

  • Samuel Teuber
  • Bernhard Beckert

This work presents insights gained by investigating the relationship between algorithmic fairness and the concept of secure information flow. The problem of enforcing secure information flow is well-studied in the context of information security: If secret information may "flow" through an algorithm or program in such a way that it can influence the program’s output, then that is considered insecure information flow as attackers could potentially observe (parts of) the secret. There is a strong correspondence between secure information flow and algorithmic fairness: if protected attributes such as race, gender, or age are treated as secret program inputs, then secure information flow means that these "secret" attributes cannot influence the result of a program. While most research in algorithmic fairness evaluation concentrates on studying the impact of algorithms (often treating the algorithm as a black-box), the concepts derived from information flow can be used both for the analysis of disparate treatment as well as disparate impact w.r.t. a structural causal model. In this paper, we examine the relationship between quantitative as well as qualitative information-flow properties and fairness. Moreover, based on this duality, we derive a new quantitative notion of fairness called fairness spread, which can be easily analyzed using quantitative information flow and which strongly relates to counterfactual fairness. We demonstrate that off-the-shelf tools for information-flow properties can be used in order to formally analyze a program's algorithmic fairness properties, including the new notion of fairness spread as well as established notions such as demographic parity.

NeurIPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper

Provably Safe Neural Network Controllers via Differential Dynamic Logic

  • Samuel Teuber
  • Stefan Mitsch
  • André Platzer

While neural networks (NNs) have a large potential as autonomous controllers for Cyber-Physical Systems, verifying the safety of neural network based control systems (NNCSs) poses significant challenges for the practical use of NNs— especially when safety is needed for unbounded time horizons. One reason for this is the intractability of analyzing NNs, ODEs and hybrid systems. To this end, we introduce VerSAILLE (Verifiably Safe AI via Logically Linked Envelopes): The first general approach that allows reusing control theory literature for NNCS verification. By joining forces, we can exploit the efficiency of NN verification tools while retaining the rigor of differential dynamic logic (dL). Based on a provably safe control envelope in dL, we derive a specification for the NN which is proven with NN verification tools. We show that a proof of the NN’s adherence to the specification is then mirrored by a dL proof on the infinite-time safety of the NNCS. The NN verification properties resulting from hybrid systems typically contain nonlinear arithmetic over formulas with arbitrary logical structure while efficient NN verification tools merely support linear constraints. To overcome this divide, we present Mosaic: An efficient, sound and complete verification approach for polynomial real arithmetic properties on piece-wise linear NNs. Mosaic partitions complex NN verification queries into simple queries and lifts off-the-shelf linear constraint tools to the nonlinear setting in a completeness-preserving manner by combining approximation with exact reasoning for counterexample regions. In our evaluation we demonstrate the versatility of VerSAILLE and Mosaic: We prove infinite-time safety on the classical Vertical Airborne Collision Avoidance NNCS verification benchmark for some scenarios while (exhaustively) enumerating counterexample regions in unsafe scenarios. We also show that our approach significantly outperforms the State-of-the-Art tools in closed-loop NNV

v2026.09.13