REVIEW
Is it the model or the metric -- On robustness measures of deeplearning models
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
Is it the model or the metric -- On robustness measures of deeplearning models
read the original abstract
Determining the robustness of deep learning models is an established and ongoing challenge within automated decision-making systems. With the advent and success of techniques that enable advanced deep learning (DL), these models are being used in widespread applications, including high-stake ones like healthcare, education, border-control. Therefore, it is critical to understand the limitations of these models and predict their regions of failures, in order to create the necessary guardrails for their successful and safe deployment. In this work, we revisit robustness, specifically investigating the sufficiency of robust accuracy (RA), within the context of deepfake detection. We present robust ratio (RR) as a complementary metric, that can quantify the changes to the normalized or probability outcomes under input perturbation. We present a comparison of RA and RR and demonstrate that despite similar RA between models, the models show varying RR under different tolerance (perturbation) levels.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.