Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userTheoretically Principled Trade-off between Robustness and Accuracy
145
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic 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.
rate research
Read More
We provide a general framework for characterizing the trade-off between accuracy and robustness in supervised learning. We propose a method and define quantities to characterize the trade-off between accuracy and robustness for a given architecture, and provide theoretical insight into the trade-off. Specifically we introduce a simple trade-off curve, define and study an influence function that captures the sensitivity, under adversarial attack, of the optima of a given loss function. We further show how adversarial training regularizes the parameters in an over-parameterized linear model, recovering the LASSO and ridge regression as special cases, which also allows us to theoretically analyze the behavior of the trade-off curve. In experiments, we demonstrate the corresponding trade-off curves of neural networks and how they vary with respect to factors such as number of layers, neurons, and across different network structures. Such information provides a useful guideline to architecture selection.
Adversarial training augments the training set with perturbations to improve the robust error (over worst-case perturbations), but it often leads to an increase in the standard error (on unperturbed test inputs). Previous explanations for this tradeoff rely on the assumption that no predictor in the hypothesis class has low standard and robust error. In this work, we precisely characterize the effect of augmentation on the standard error in linear regression when the optimal linear predictor has zero standard and robust error. In particular, we show that the standard error could increase even when the augmented perturbations have noiseless observations from the optimal linear predictor. We then prove that the recently proposed robust self-training (RST) estimator improves robust error without sacrificing standard error for noiseless linear regression. Empirically, for neural networks, we find that RST with different adversarial training methods improves both standard and robust error for random and adversarial rotations and adversarial $ell_infty$ perturbations in CIFAR-10.
The popular Alternating Least Squares (ALS) algorithm for tensor decomposition is efficient and easy to implement, but often converges to poor local optima---particularly when the weights of the factors are non-uniform. We propose a modification of the ALS approach that is as efficient as standard ALS, but provably recovers the true factors with random initialization under standard incoherence assumptions on the factors of the tensor. We demonstrate the significant practical superiority of our approach over traditional ALS for a variety of tasks on synthetic data---including tensor factorization on exact, noisy and over-complete tensors, as well as tensor completion---and for computing word embeddings from a third-order word tri-occurrence tensor.
To date, there has been no formal study of the statistical cost of interpretability in machine learning. As such, the discourse around potential trade-offs is often informal and misconceptions abound. In this work, we aim to initiate a formal study of these trade-offs. A seemingly insurmountable roadblock is the lack of any agreed upon definition of interpretability. Instead, we propose a shift in perspective. Rather than attempt to define interpretability, we propose to model the emph{act} of emph{enforcing} interpretability. As a starting point, we focus on the setting of empirical risk minimization for binary classification, and view interpretability as a constraint placed on learning. That is, we assume we are given a subset of hypothesis that are deemed to be interpretable, possibly depending on the data distribution and other aspects of the context. We then model the act of enforcing interpretability as that of performing empirical risk minimization over the set of interpretable hypotheses. This model allows us to reason about the statistical implications of enforcing interpretability, using known results in statistical learning theory. Focusing on accuracy, we perform a case analysis, explaining why one may or may not observe a trade-off between accuracy and interpretability when the restriction to interpretable classifiers does or does not come at the cost of some excess statistical risk. We close with some worked examples and some open problems, which we hope will spur further theoretical development around the tradeoffs involved in interpretability.
Despite achieving remarkable success in various domains, recent studies have uncovered the vulnerability of deep neural networks to adversarial perturbations, creating concerns on model generalizability and new threats such as prediction-evasive misclassification or stealthy reprogramming. Among different defense proposals, stochastic network defenses such as random neuron activation pruning or random perturbation to layer inputs are shown to be promising for attack mitigation. However, one critical drawback of current defenses is that the robustness enhancement is at the cost of noticeable performance degradation on legitimate data, e.g., large drop in test accuracy. This paper is motivated by pursuing for a better trade-off between adversarial robustness and test accuracy for stochastic network defenses. We propose Defense Efficiency Score (DES), a comprehensive metric that measures the gain in unsuccessful attack attempts at the cost of drop in test accuracy of any defense. To achieve a better DES, we propose hierarchical random switching (HRS), which protects neural networks through a novel randomization scheme. A HRS-protected model contains several blocks of randomly switching channels to prevent adversaries from exploiting fixed model structures and parameters for their malicious purposes. Extensive experiments show that HRS is superior in defending against state-of-the-art white-box and adaptive adversarial misclassification attacks. We also demonstrate the effectiveness of HRS in defending adversarial reprogramming, which is the first defense against adversarial programs. Moreover, in most settings the average DES of HRS is at least 5X higher than current stochastic network defenses, validating its significantly improved robustness-accuracy trade-off.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
