Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Random Spiking and Systematic Evaluation of Defenses Against Adversarial Examples

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1812.01804 v4 pith:UOGHDKR5 submitted 2018-12-05 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CRstat.ML

Random Spiking and Systematic Evaluation of Defenses Against Adversarial Examples

classification cs.LG cs.AIcs.CRstat.ML
keywords adversarialdefenseexamplesframeworkrandomclassifiersdifferentevaluation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Image classifiers often suffer from adversarial examples, which are generated by strategically adding a small amount of noise to input images to trick classifiers into misclassification. Over the years, many defense mechanisms have been proposed, and different researchers have made seemingly contradictory claims on their effectiveness. We present an analysis of possible adversarial models, and propose an evaluation framework for comparing different defense mechanisms. As part of the framework, we introduce a more powerful and realistic adversary strategy. Furthermore, we propose a new defense mechanism called Random Spiking (RS), which generalizes dropout and introduces random noises in the training process in a controlled manner. Evaluations under our proposed framework suggest RS delivers better protection against adversarial examples than many existing schemes.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.