arXiv Machine Learning

When Can Safe Controllers Adapt? Information before Commitment

arXiv:2607. 16895v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safe adaptive control is online adaptation under a safety guarantee on the learning trajectory itself.

arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 17

Consistent Model Chasing Is Minimax Optimal: The Exact Value of Scalar Adversarial Adaptive Control under Large Parametric Uncertainty

arXiv:2608. 13651v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We solve exactly a fundamental problem of adaptive control against adversarial disturbances: regulate the scalar system $x_{t+1} = ax_t + u_t + w_t$, $x_0=0$, $\|w\|_\infty \le 1$, where the constant pole $a \in [-\Delta, \Delta]$ is unknown in sign and magnitude and $\Delta$ is arbitrarily large.

By Dimitar Ho
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 21

Provably Optimal Reinforcement Learning under Safety Filtering

The paper proves that using a permissive safety filter in reinforcement learning does not compromise asymptotic performance. By formalizing safety through a safety‑critical Markov decision process and a filtered MDP, the authors show that optimal policies in the filtered MDP achieve the same return as the best safe policy in the original setting. Experiments on Safety Gymnasium confirm zero violations during training and performance that matches or exceeds unfiltered baselines.

By Donggeon David Oh, Duy P. Nguyen, Haimin Hu, Jaime Fern\'andez Fisac
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 3

Exchange Policy Optimization Algorithm for Semi-Infinite Safe Reinforcement Learning

The paper introduces Exchange Policy Optimization (EPO), a framework for semi‑infinite safe reinforcement learning that handles infinitely many constraints by iteratively solving finite subproblems. EPO expands or deletes constraints based on tolerance violations and Lagrange multipliers, maintaining computational tractability while converging to an optimal policy with bounded safety violations. The authors prove finite convergence, provide iteration bounds, and quantify the suboptimality gap under mild assumptions.

By Jiaming Zhang, Yujie Yang, Haoning Wang, Liping Zhang, Shengbo Eben Li
arXiv AI
Aug 28

Safety Does Not Compose: Non-Decaying Loop State for Autonomous LLM Agents

The paper demonstrates that safety mechanisms for autonomous large language model agents fail to compose across iterative loops, as trajectory‑scoped monitors cannot detect attacks whose evidence is spread over multiple iterations. It introduces LoopHarness, a system that maintains a persistent, non‑decaying safety state across loops, bounding unauthorized actions with a constant that does not grow with the number of iterations. The authors provide a comprehensive evaluation protocol, including attacks that require cross‑iteration evidence, module ablations, and adaptive white‑box red‑team testing.

By Chenhao Wu, Haoxuan Jia, Yang Liu, Yingguang Yang, Yuhan Lin, Chongyang Zhang, Hao Zheng, Yulin Huang, Jianshen Zhang, Yongzhi Qi, Shang Luo, Kefu Xu, Jifeng Zhu, Bin Chong
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 15

Contract-Based Compositional Shielding for Safe Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning

arXiv:2606. 14130v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safe coordination problems surface in multi-agent reinforcement learning when global safety cannot be enforced by any agent unilaterally: the admissibility of one agent's action may depend on the dynamics of other agents.

By Omar Adalat, Edwin Hamel-De le Court, Francesco Belardinelli