Source author record

James Sharp

James Sharp appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

4works
6topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Abstraction and Symbolic Execution of Deep Neural Networks with Bayesian Approximation of Hidden Features

Intensive research has been conducted on the verification and validation of deep neural networks (DNNs), aiming to understand if, and how, DNNs can be applied to safety critical applications. However, existing verification and validation techniques are limited by their scalability, over both the size of the DNN and the size of the dataset. In this paper, we propose a novel abstraction method which abstracts a DNN and a dataset into a Bayesian network (BN). We make use of dimensionality reduction techniques to identify hidden features that have been learned by hidden layers of the DNN, and associate each hidden feature with a node of the BN. On this BN, we can conduct probabilistic inference to understand the behaviours of the DNN processing data. More importantly, we can derive a runtime monitoring approach to detect in operational time rare inputs and covariate shift of the input data. We can also adapt existing structural coverage-guided testing techniques (i.e., based on low-level elements of the DNN such as neurons), in order to generate test cases that better exercise hidden features. We implement and evaluate the BN abstraction technique using our DeepConcolic tool available at https://github.com/TrustAI/DeepConcolic.

preprint2020arXiv

A Survey of Safety and Trustworthiness of Deep Neural Networks: Verification, Testing, Adversarial Attack and Defence, and Interpretability

In the past few years, significant progress has been made on deep neural networks (DNNs) in achieving human-level performance on several long-standing tasks. With the broader deployment of DNNs on various applications, the concerns over their safety and trustworthiness have been raised in public, especially after the widely reported fatal incidents involving self-driving cars. Research to address these concerns is particularly active, with a significant number of papers released in the past few years. This survey paper conducts a review of the current research effort into making DNNs safe and trustworthy, by focusing on four aspects: verification, testing, adversarial attack and defence, and interpretability. In total, we survey 202 papers, most of which were published after 2017.

preprint2020arXiv

Reliability Validation of Learning Enabled Vehicle Tracking

This paper studies the reliability of a real-world learning-enabled system, which conducts dynamic vehicle tracking based on a high-resolution wide-area motion imagery input. The system consists of multiple neural network components -- to process the imagery inputs -- and multiple symbolic (Kalman filter) components -- to analyse the processed information for vehicle tracking. It is known that neural networks suffer from adversarial examples, which make them lack robustness. However, it is unclear if and how the adversarial examples over learning components can affect the overall system-level reliability. By integrating a coverage-guided neural network testing tool, DeepConcolic, with the vehicle tracking system, we found that (1) the overall system can be resilient to some adversarial examples thanks to the existence of other components, and (2) the overall system presents an extra level of uncertainty which cannot be determined by analysing the deep learning components only. This research suggests the need for novel verification and validation methods for learning-enabled systems.

preprint1993arXiv

Combinatorics on Ideals and Axiom A

Throughout this abstract let U be a fixed p-point ultrafilter and let I be the dual ideal. Grigorieff forcing is P(U)={p:omega to 2|dom(p) is an element of I} ordered by reverse inclusion. It is well known that Grigorieff forcing is proper. The main result of this paper is the following: THEOREM: Gregorieff forcing does not satisfy Axiom A. To prove this we use the following game, denoted G(U), for two players playing alternatively: Player I plays a partition of omega, {J_n| n<omega}, such that for all n<omega, J_n is an element of I; At the nth turn Player II plays a finite subset F_n of J_n. Player II wins iff the union of the F_n is an element of U. The following two Lemmas prove the Theorem: LEMMA 1: If P(U) satisfies axiom A, then player II has a winning strategy in the game G(U). LEMMA 2:The game G(U) is undetermined.