Recognition: unknown
Theoretically Principled Trade-off between Robustness and Accuracy
read the original abstract
We identify a trade-off between robustness and accuracy that serves as a guiding principle in the design of defenses against adversarial examples. Although this problem has been widely studied empirically, much remains unknown concerning the theory underlying this trade-off. In this work, we decompose the prediction error for adversarial examples (robust error) as the sum of the natural (classification) error and boundary error, and provide a differentiable upper bound using the theory of classification-calibrated loss, which is shown to be the tightest possible upper bound uniform over all probability distributions and measurable predictors. Inspired by our theoretical analysis, we also design a new defense method, TRADES, to trade adversarial robustness off against accuracy. Our proposed algorithm performs well experimentally in real-world datasets. The methodology is the foundation of our entry to the NeurIPS 2018 Adversarial Vision Challenge in which we won the 1st place out of ~2,000 submissions, surpassing the runner-up approach by $11.41\%$ in terms of mean $\ell_2$ perturbation distance.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Laundering AI Authority with Adversarial Examples
Adversarial examples enable AI authority laundering by causing production VLMs to give authoritative but wrong responses on subtly perturbed images, with success rates of 22-100% using decade-old attack methods.
-
Auto-ART: Structured Literature Synthesis and Automated Adversarial Robustness Testing
Auto-ART delivers the first structured synthesis of adversarial robustness consensus plus an executable multi-norm testing framework that flags gradient masking in 92% of cases on RobustBench and reveals a 23.5 pp rob...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.