We present NNV3, the latest version of the Neural Network Verification (NNV) tool, a MATLAB framework for formal verification of deep learning models and learning-enabled cyber-physical systems. Building on the set-based reachability foundation of NNV 1.0 (FFNNs, CNNs, NNCS) and NNV 2.0 (RNNs, SSNNs, neural ODEs), NNV3 introduces new members of the Star-set family: ModelStar for verifying networks under weight perturbation, VolumeStar for video and 3D volumetric inputs, and GraphStar for graph neural networks. A conformal-inference-based probabilistic reachability mode complements sound analysis for problems where deterministic verification is intractable, while FairNNV certifies counterfactual and individual fairness properties over continuous input regions. NNV3 introduces new benchmarks for malware detection, graph-based power-system models, medical imaging, variable-length time series data, and action recognition. NNV3 also incorporates tutorials and developer guides through a unified documentation site. This paper details these major updates, demonstrating NNV's maturation into a comprehensive, robust, and accessible verification tool for a diverse range of AI systems.
Table 1 : Overview of major features available in NNV. Items in regular weight are NNV 1.0 baseline; blue italics denote additions introduced in NNV 2.0; purple bold denote new capabilities introduced in NNV3.
ϵ
Ver.
Unk.
Avg. Time (s)
1/255
7
3
35.54
2/255
7
3
37.88
3/255
7
3
36.49
Table 2 : VolumeStar verification on ZoomIn-4f under L∞ perturbations (10 samples per ϵ , 30-min timeout). Ver. verified robust; Unk. unknown due to over-approximation.
CF
IF ( ϵ )
Model
metric
( ϵ=0 )
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.05
0.07
0.10
Small
VF (%)
89
87
84
81
69
50
22
Time (s)
0.78
0.89
1.06
1.40
2.17
3.41
5.53
Medium
VF (%)
87
86
84
82
71
50
27
Time (s)
0.72
2.64
5.76
10.10
21.75
39.73
98.70
Table 4 : FairNNV verification on Adult Census: Verified Fairness (VF, %) and per-sample verification time (s). Counterfactual fairness (CF) perturbs only the sensitive attribute ( ϵ=0 ); individual fairness (IF) additionally perturbs non-sensitive features at radius ϵ .
ACAS p3 ( N=20 )
ACAS p4 ( N=20 )
RL ( N=50 )
V
X
U
T
S
V
X
U
T
S
V
X
U
T
S
AIVL
0
3
17
0
0.06
0
1
19
0
0.07
20
11
19
0
0.04
exact
8
3
0
9
58.23
9
3
0
8
83.99
32
15
1
2
5.36
approx
10
3
7
0
0.69
9
3
8
0
0.90
32
14
4
0
0.14
r-50
1
2
17
0
0.30
1
2
17
0
0.30
32
14
4
0
0.08
Table 5 : Tool comparison on fully-connected VNNLIB benchmarks. Per cell: V verified, X violated, U unknown, T timeout, S mean per-instance time (seconds). Timeout cap: 900 s. AIVL uses est-bnds ; r-50 is NNV3’s relax-star-range-50 . Bold marks NNV3’s strongest verification count per benchmark.
NNV3
AIVL [ 63 ]
α,β -Crown [ 86 , 79 ]
CORA [ 3 , 2 , 43 ]
FastBATLLNN [ 19 ]
JuliaReach [ 8 , 58 ]
Marabou [ 38 , 83 , 82 ]
NeuralSAT [ 17 , 16 ]
NeVer2 [ 15 ]
nnenum [ 5 ]
ReachNN [ 33 , 18 ]
Reluplex [ 37 ]
SobolBox [ 14 ]
StarV [ 66 ]
Verinet [ 28 ]
Verisig [ 34 ]
FFNN
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
×
✓
✓
✓
✓
×
CNN
✓
✓
✓
✓
×
✓∗
✓
✓
✓
✓
×
×
✓
✓
✓
×
RNN
✓
×
✓
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
✓
×
×
SSNN
✓
×
✓∗
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
✓
×
×
TDNNs
✓
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
GNNs
✓
×
×
✓
×
×
✓∗
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
Table 8 : Comparison of neural network verification tools by supported architectures and applications, with ✓ meaning supported by a tool and × not supported. We use ∗ to indicate partial support. In purple italics , the newly supported architecture/applications by NNV3 . WPP signifies model perturbations.
Neural network verification is an active and rapidly maturing research area, with a growing ecosystem of solvers and tools. The VNN-LIB standard was introduced to support interoperability in this ecosystem, but Version1.0 has several serious short-comings as a formal foundation: it lacks a precise syntax, semantics, and type system, offers limited expressivity, and relies on externally defined ONNX models whose semantics are informal and constantly evolving. The latter distinguishes VNN-LIB from established standards such as SMT-LIB, where queries are self-contained and have fixed semantics. In this paper we address these challenges by developing the theoretical foundations of VNN-LIB2.0. Our key contribution is the introduction of the notion of a \emph{network theory}, which abstractly characterises the minimal semantic interface required from a neural network model format. This abstraction enables VNN-LIB to be defined independently of any specific ONNX version while remaining compatible with evolving model representations. Building on this foundation, we present a formal syntax for a more expressive query language, a type system for it over the numeric domains provided by the network theory, and finally a formal semantics. To ensure internal consistency, the standard is mechanised in the Agda theorem prover. VNN-LIB~2.0 therefore provides robust and rigorous foundations for trustworthy neural network verification.
Ann Roy, Allen Antony, Andrea Gimelli +1
University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia · University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy
Neural ordinary differential equations (neural ODE) gained attention in safety critical settings such as continuous-time controllers for cyber-physical systems and classifiers integrated into automated decision pipelines, raising the question whether their behavior can be formally verified. Existing tools dedicated to neural ODE provide only a single reachability call without iterative input-set refinement, limiting the precision of their verdicts to whatever one reachability call can deliver. We present TNODEV, the first formal verifier for neural ODE that integrates a falsification checker, a fast interval-based reachability backend based on continuous-time mixed monotonicity, a verification and refinement loop with three input-set splitting heuristics, and a parallel scheduler in a single end-to-end pipeline. TNODEV supports safe-set inclusion verification on pure neural ODE, neural ODE in closed loop with a neural network controller and general neural ODE (GNODE), with the safe set specified either as an interval or as the half-space intersection induced by a target classification label. We evaluate TNODEV on a range of benchmarks across safe-set inclusion and classification-robustness properties, including a direct reachability comparison against NNV 2.0 and CORA and a verification comparison against NNV 2.0 on MNIST general neural ODE classifiers.
Neural network verifiers aim to provide formal guarantees on model behavior, but existing verification benchmarks are fundamentally limited by their lack of ground-truth labels. As a result, verifier evaluation relies on indirect heuristics, which prevents exact scoring and systematic study of verifier failure modes. We address this gap by introducing a reusable framework for generating verification instances whose ground-truth robustness labels are known a priori through analytic construction. Our framework led to the discovery of multiple numeric tolerance concerns and an implementation bug in popular verifiers, highlighting the need for ground-truth labels. Additionally, to systematically study verifier failure modes, we introduce the verification Difficulty Profile, a collection of estimable quantities capturing distinct sources of instance hardness. Using our framework and these profiles, we evaluate five state-of-the-art verifiers and show that different instances stress distinct aspects of the verification pipeline. We show that these results can aid the future development of verifiers as they provide actionable targets for improving numerical reliability, relaxation quality, and search behavior. Our code is publicly available: https://github.com/dtroxell19/VeriStressGT.git.
David Troxell, Yulia Alexandr, Sofia Hunt +2
Department of Statistics & Data Science, University of California, Los Angeles · Department of Mathematics, University of California, Los Angeles · Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences, Leipzig