Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

APBench: A Unified Benchmark for Availability Poisoning Attacks and Defenses

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 2308.03258 v1 pith:AQMGQK6X submitted 2023-08-07 cs.CV cs.CR

classification cs.CVcs.CR
keywords poisoningattacksapbenchavailabilitydefensemethodsbenchmarkdata
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The efficacy of availability poisoning, a method of poisoning data by injecting imperceptible perturbations to prevent its use in model training, has been a hot subject of investigation. Previous research suggested that it was difficult to effectively counteract such poisoning attacks. However, the introduction of various defense methods has challenged this notion. Due to the rapid progress in this field, the performance of different novel methods cannot be accurately validated due to variations in experimental setups. To further evaluate the attack and defense capabilities of these poisoning methods, we have developed a benchmark -- APBench for assessing the efficacy of adversarial poisoning. APBench consists of 9 state-of-the-art availability poisoning attacks, 8 defense algorithms, and 4 conventional data augmentation techniques. We also have set up experiments with varying different poisoning ratios, and evaluated the attacks on multiple datasets and their transferability across model architectures. We further conducted a comprehensive evaluation of 2 additional attacks specifically targeting unsupervised models. Our results reveal the glaring inadequacy of existing attacks in safeguarding individual privacy. APBench is open source and available to the deep learning community: https://github.com/lafeat/apbench.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. How Far Are We from True Unlearnability?

    cs.LG 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Current unlearnable examples fail under multi-task training, and the proposed SAL and UD metrics quantify how far each method is from true unlearnability.

Pith tools