When Can Safe Controllers Adapt? Information before Commitment

Safe adaptive control is online adaptation under a safety guarantee on the learning trajectory itself. The controller may use any causal, history-dependent rule and act differently across environments as data arrive. Only its safety guarantee is uniform: the same rule must satisfy it under every initially plausible model. Performance is measured against a safe oracle that knows the realized model. Many finite-time analyses assume persistent excitation of the uniformly safe closed loop, so the data distinguish every pair of models requiring different control decisions. Under that assumption, feasibility is already settled; only the rate remains. We ask instead: Do the safety constraints permit such an informative experiment at all? While an alternative remains plausible, the controller must preserve a safe continuation under it. We call the first action that forecloses such a continuation commitment. Chance safety allows commitment only on an event rare under the alternative, and the evidence must arrive beforehand: the observation generated by the committing action is too late. We define precommitment information as the KL divergence between learner-visible laws stopped before commitment. Our main result is a causal reduction. The commitment rule determines (1) the probability that safety permits commitment under the alternative, (2) the target-side cost of remaining noncommittal, (3) and the information available when the decision is made. Bounded precommitment information therefore leaves a fixed fraction of the oracle gap unavoidable. If the gap is Ω(T), every uniformly safe policy has linear regret. We establish the obstruction in a constrained linear system with quadratic regulation cost. We also prove recovery in special cases and derive semidefinite upper certificates for deterministic linear-Gaussian systems.

Learning from World Feedback: Why Model Uncertainty Fails as a Risk Signal in Model-Based RL

The RLxF programme argues that learning signals should come from world feedback rather than from internal model proxies. We instantiate this position in safe model-based control and distil it into three concrete design principles. Empirically, across four world-model architectures spanning a 2x MSE range, MPC planning is statistically equivalent (TOST, n=200), and dynamics-based uncertainty penalties increase collision rates from 26% to 34%: the standard MBRL safety proxy is anti-correlated with safety in this regime. Replacing the model-internal proxy with three world-feedback signals (a sensor-derived margin via minimum lidar, a temporal signal via time-to-collision, and an outcome-supervised feedback model g_psi trained on prior collision labels, structurally analogous to outcome-trained reward models in RLHF) reduces collisions to 1-14% without retraining the world model or the planner. The mechanism is structural: model uncertainty has support over state-prediction space, whereas task risk has support over constraint boundaries, with empirical correlation r < 0.15. From this we extract three RLxF principles (ground risk in world outcomes, validate proxies before deployment, and substitute outcome-trained feedback models when direct world signals are unavailable) and argue they apply equally to model-based control and to verifier-based or RLHF approaches in LLM alignment.

SMC-ES: Automated synthesis of formally verified control policies

The deployment of autonomous cyber-physical systems in safety-critical environments requires closed-loop control strategies (i.e., policies) that are not only performant but also provably safe and robust. While learning-based methodologies such as Reinforcement Learning offer flexible and scalable approaches to automatically synthesize such controllers, they typically lack the formal guarantees necessary for safe deployment. To bridge this gap, we propose a novel simulation-based methodology to automatically synthesize policies with formal guarantees regarding performance, safety, and robustness specifications. Specifically, given a set of properties to verify, a confidence parameter $δ$ and an allowable failure probability $\varepsilon$, our method guarantees that the synthesized policy comes with a certificate: with confidence at least $1 - δ$, the probability of encountering a scenario where the given properties are violated is at most $\varepsilon$. We demonstrate the feasibility of our approach by developing SMC-ES, an algorithm that integrates Evolutionary Strategies with Statistical Model Checking-based verification. We evaluate SMC-ES on a suite of continuous control tasks using Gymnasium and Safety Gymnasium testbeds. Results show that, at the price of a sustainable increase in computational cost, our algorithm provides formal guarantees regarding performance, safety, and robustness specifications, while performing competitively against leading model-free Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) and Safe-DRL baselines.