mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Revisiting Adversarial Risk

arXiv 1806.02924 ↗First posted 7 Jun 2018stat.ML cs.LGcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent works on adversarial perturbations show that there is an inherent trade-off between standard test accuracy and adversarial accuracy. Specifically, they show that no classifier can simultaneously be robust to adversarial perturbations and achieve high standard test accuracy. However, this is contrary to the standard notion that on tasks such as image classification, humans are robust classifiers with low error rate. In this work, we show that the main reason behind this confusion is the inexact definition of adversarial perturbation that is used in the literature. To fix this issue, we propose a slight, yet important modification to the existing definition of adversarial perturbation. Based on the modified definition, we show that there is no trade-off between adversarial and standard accuracies; there exist classifiers that are robust and achieve high standard accuracy. We further study several properties of this new definition of adversarial risk and its relation to the existing definition.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 7 Jun 2018.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 3; 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 1.

9 papers.