BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Kevin Delmas

Kevin Delmas contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Artificial IntelligenceComputer VisionMachine LearningRoboticseess.IVSoftware Engineering

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - Baseline
3works
0followers
6topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

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

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2023arXiv

Out-Of-Distribution Detection Is Not All You Need

The usage of deep neural networks in safety-critical systems is limited by our ability to guarantee their correct behavior. Runtime monitors are components aiming to identify unsafe predictions and discard them before they can lead to catastrophic consequences. Several recent works on runtime monitoring have focused on out-of-distribution (OOD) detection, i.e., identifying inputs that are different from the training data. In this work, we argue that OOD detection is not a well-suited framework to design efficient runtime monitors and that it is more relevant to evaluate monitors based on their ability to discard incorrect predictions. We call this setting out-ofmodel-scope detection and discuss the conceptual differences with OOD. We also conduct extensive experiments on popular datasets from the literature to show that studying monitors in the OOD setting can be misleading: 1. very good OOD results can give a false impression of safety, 2. comparison under the OOD setting does not allow identifying the best monitor to detect errors. Finally, we also show that removing erroneous training data samples helps to train better monitors.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Evaluation of Runtime Monitoring for UAV Emergency Landing

To certify UAV operations in populated areas, risk mitigation strategies -- such as Emergency Landing (EL) -- must be in place to account for potential failures. EL aims at reducing ground risk by finding safe landing areas using on-board sensors. The first contribution of this paper is to present a new EL approach, in line with safety requirements introduced in recent research. In particular, the proposed EL pipeline includes mechanisms to monitor learning based components during execution. This way, another contribution is to study the behavior of Machine Learning Runtime Monitoring (MLRM) approaches within the context of a real-world critical system. A new evaluation methodology is introduced, and applied to assess the practical safety benefits of three MLRM mechanisms. The proposed approach is compared to a default mitigation strategy (open a parachute when a failure is detected), and appears to be much safer.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Unifying Evaluation of Machine Learning Safety Monitors

With the increasing use of Machine Learning (ML) in critical autonomous systems, runtime monitors have been developed to detect prediction errors and keep the system in a safe state during operations. Monitors have been proposed for different applications involving diverse perception tasks and ML models, and specific evaluation procedures and metrics are used for different contexts. This paper introduces three unified safety-oriented metrics, representing the safety benefits of the monitor (Safety Gain), the remaining safety gaps after using it (Residual Hazard), and its negative impact on the system's performance (Availability Cost). To compute these metrics, one requires to define two return functions, representing how a given ML prediction will impact expected future rewards and hazards. Three use-cases (classification, drone landing, and autonomous driving) are used to demonstrate how metrics from the literature can be expressed in terms of the proposed metrics. Experimental results on these examples show how different evaluation choices impact the perceived performance of a monitor. As our formalism requires us to formulate explicit safety assumptions, it allows us to ensure that the evaluation conducted matches the high-level system requirements.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access