AI & ML
On the Degree of Safety: Beyond Safe or Unsafe with Control Barrier Functions
arXiv cs.SY0 views
arXiv:2609.03319v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: A valid control barrier function (CBF) certifies if its represented safe set can be rendered forward invariant, and the sign of its value indicates whether a state is safe or not, but it does not quantify a degree of safety beyond the binary indication. In this paper, we show that among valid CBFs representing the same safe set, interior values and gradients can be changed arbitrarily, so neither quantity determines a degree of safety that is independent of how the set is represented. We also show that whether a candidate CBF-based inequality constraint is feasible does not by itself quantify a degree of safety. In particular, infeasibility can occur either because the safe set is not controlled invariant or because the candidate CBF representation fails. This motivates our distinction between intrinsic and representational infeasibility. Finally, we introduce the invariance authority demand (IAD), a representation-independent degree of safety that quantifies the control authority required for maintaining safety and can be used to guide actuator redesign or safe set repair.
Source:https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.03319PreviousBiased Stochastic Gradient Descent under Local Geometry, with Application to Data-Driven LQRNextReadiness-Constrained Pre-Islanding Dispatch for Military Microgrids
Related posts

What Arconatese 3-4 Pontedera tells us about Serie D - Girone D
0dev.to Watercooler
Your AI agent got an HTTP error. Should it retry?
0dev.to Discuss
Is AI dangerous, or just misunderstood?
0dev.to Discuss
Why we price a developer tool per fix instead of per seat
0dev.to Productivity
My LLM-Powered Sidekick for Painless PR Descriptions
0dev.to Productivity
Reward-Adaptive Backtracking GFlowNet: A Technique Worth Understanding
0dev.to Productivity