mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Bridging the Gap Between Adversarial Robustness and Optimization Bias

arXiv 2102.08868 ↗First posted 17 Feb 2021cs.LG cs.CV stat.MLcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We demonstrate that the choice of optimizer, neural network architecture, and regularizer significantly affect the adversarial robustness of linear neural networks, providing guarantees without the need for adversarial training. To this end, we revisit a known result linking maximally robust classifiers and minimum norm solutions, and combine it with recent results on the implicit bias of optimizers. First, we show that, under certain conditions, it is possible to achieve both perfect standard accuracy and a certain degree of robustness, simply by training an overparametrized model using the implicit bias of the optimization. In that regime, there is a direct relationship between the type of the optimizer and the attack to which the model is robust. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first to study the impact of optimization methods such as sign gradient descent and proximal methods on adversarial robustness. Second, we characterize the robustness of linear convolutional models, showing that they resist attacks subject to a constraint on the Fourier-ℓ_∞ norm. To illustrate these findings we design a novel Fourier-ℓ_∞ attack that finds adversarial examples with controllable frequencies. We evaluate Fourier-ℓ_∞ robustness of adversarially-trained deep CIFAR-10 models from the standard RobustBench benchmark and visualize adversarial perturbations.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 66 of its 85 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Feb 2021.

Builds on

66 of 85 references.

References · 66

  1. 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
  2. 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,326
  3. 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,114
  4. 2016Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networkscited by 2,976
  5. 2016Understanding deep learning requires rethinking generalizationcited by 1,657
  6. 2019Theoretically Principled Trade-off between Robustness and Accuracycited by 1,510
  7. 2020Reliable evaluation of adversarial robustness with an ensemble of diverse parameter-free attackscited by 1,442
  8. 2019Certified Adversarial Robustness via Randomized Smoothingcited by 1,324
  9. 2018Obfuscated Gradients Give a False Sense of Security: Circumventing Defenses to Adversarial Examplescited by 1,259
  10. 2019Adversarial Examples Are Not Bugs, They Are Featurescited by 950
  11. 2018Robustness May Be at Odds with Accuracycited by 873
  12. 2019Deep Double Descent: Where Bigger Models and More Data Hurtcited by 667
38 more
  1. 2020RobustBench: a standardized adversarial robustness benchmarkcited by 659
  2. 2016CVXPY: A Python-Embedded Modeling Language for Convex Optimizationcited by 633
  3. 2017Provable defenses against adversarial examples via the convex outer adversarial polytopecited by 564
  4. 2020On Adaptive Attacks to Adversarial Example Defensescited by 547
  5. 2017Adversarial Patchcited by 514
  6. 2019Surprises in High-Dimensional Ridgeless Least Squares Interpolationcited by 508
  7. 2019Unlabeled Data Improves Adversarial Robustnesscited by 415
  8. 2018On the Effectiveness of Interval Bound Propagation for Training Verifiably Robust Modelscited by 322
  9. 2018Adversarially Robust Generalization Requires More Datacited by 318
  10. 2019Gradient Descent Maximizes the Margin of Homogeneous Neural Networkscited by 308
  11. 2019A Fourier Perspective on Model Robustness in Computer Visioncited by 288
  12. 2020Uncovering the Limits of Adversarial Training against Norm-Bounded Adversarial Examplescited by 275
  13. 2020Implicit Bias of Gradient Descent for Wide Two-layer Neural Networks Trained with the Logistic Losscited by 267
  14. 2018Characterizing Implicit Bias in Terms of Optimization Geometrycited by 259
  15. 2018Implicit Bias of Gradient Descent on Linear Convolutional Networkscited by 251
  16. 2017Improving the Adversarial Robustness and Interpretability of Deep Neural Networks by Regularizing their Input Gradientscited by 236
  17. 2017Formal Guarantees on the Robustness of a Classifier against Adversarial Manipulationcited by 182
  18. 2018Gradient descent aligns the layers of deep linear networkscited by 182
  19. 2019Adversarial Training and Robustness for Multiple Perturbationscited by 182
  20. 2018Robustness via curvature regularization, and vice versacited by 174
  21. 2020Directional convergence and alignment in deep learningcited by 172
  22. 2018MMA Training: Direct Input Space Margin Maximization through Adversarial Trainingcited by 171
  23. 2020Understanding and Mitigating the Tradeoff Between Robustness and Accuracycited by 148
  24. 2019Adversarial Robustness through Local Linearizationcited by 146
  25. 2018Regularization Matters: Generalization and Optimization of Neural Nets v.s. their Induced Kernelcited by 131
  26. 2019A Convex Relaxation Barrier to Tight Robustness Verification of Neural Networkscited by 124
  27. 2016Robust Large Margin Deep Neural Networkscited by 117
  28. 2019A Function Space View of Bounded Norm Infinite Width ReLU Nets: The Multivariate Casecited by 113
  29. 2018Large Margin Deep Networks for Classificationcited by 110
  30. 2018Convergence of Gradient Descent on Separable Datacited by 108
  31. 2020Smooth Adversarial Trainingcited by 89
  32. 2019Adversarial Robustness Against the Union of Multiple Perturbation Modelscited by 88
  33. 2019A Model of Double Descent for High-dimensional Binary Linear Classificationcited by 81
  34. 2018Low Frequency Adversarial Perturbationcited by 80
  35. 2018Adversarial vulnerability for any classifiercited by 78
  36. 2015Analysis of classifiers' robustness to adversarial perturbationscited by 76
  37. 2020Precise Tradeoffs in Adversarial Training for Linear Regressioncited by 76
  38. 2020A Unifying View on Implicit Bias in Training Linear Neural Networkscited by 74

50 most cited of 66 All 66 (JSON)

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 0; 2023: 2; 2024: 2.

5 papers.