mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Spoofing Generalization: When Can't You Trust Proprietary Models?

arXiv 2106.08393 ↗First posted 15 Jun 2021cs.LG cs.CR cs.DScited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In this work, we study the computational complexity of determining whether a machine learning model that perfectly fits the training data will generalizes to unseen data. In particular, we study the power of a malicious agent whose goal is to construct a model g that fits its training data and nothing else, but is indistinguishable from an accurate model f. We say that g strongly spoofs f if no polynomial-time algorithm can tell them apart. If instead we restrict to algorithms that run in nc time for some fixed c, we say that g c-weakly spoofs f. Our main results are 1. Under cryptographic assumptions, strong spoofing is possible and 2. For any c> 0, c-weak spoofing is possible unconditionally While the assumption of a malicious agent is an extreme scenario (hopefully companies training large models are not malicious), we believe that it sheds light on the inherent difficulties of blindly trusting large proprietary models or data.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jun 2021.

Builds on

4 of 28 references.

References · 4

  1. 2017Spectrally-normalized margin bounds for neural networkscited by 681
  2. 2017Size-Independent Sample Complexity of Neural Networkscited by 289
  3. 2019Quantifying Interpretability and Trust in Machine Learning Systemscited by 49
  4. 2020Indistinguishability Obfuscation from Well-Founded Assumptionscited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year

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

2 papers.