mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

RoMA: a Method for Neural Network Robustness Measurement and Assessment

arXiv 2110.11088 ↗First posted 21 Oct 2021cs.LG cs.AIcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Neural network models have become the leading solution for a large variety of tasks, such as classification, language processing, protein folding, and others. However, their reliability is heavily plagued by adversarial inputs: small input perturbations that cause the model to produce erroneous outputs. Adversarial inputs can occur naturally when the system's environment behaves randomly, even in the absence of a malicious adversary, and are a severe cause for concern when attempting to deploy neural networks within critical systems. In this paper, we present a new statistical method, called Robustness Measurement and Assessment (RoMA), which can measure the expected robustness of a neural network model. Specifically, RoMA determines the probability that a random input perturbation might cause misclassification. The method allows us to provide formal guarantees regarding the expected frequency of errors that a trained model will encounter after deployment. Our approach can be applied to large-scale, black-box neural networks, which is a significant advantage compared to recently proposed verification methods. We apply our approach in two ways: comparing the robustness of different models, and measuring how a model's robustness is affected by the magnitude of input perturbation. One interesting insight obtained through this work is that, in a classification network, different output labels can exhibit very different robustness levels. We term this phenomenon categorial robustness. Our ability to perform risk and robustness assessments on a categorial basis opens the door to risk mitigation, which may prove to be a significant step towards neural network certification in safety-critical applications.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Oct 2021.

Builds on

19 of 53 references.

References · 19

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  2. 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,364
  3. 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,364
  4. 2016Densely Connected Convolutional Networkscited by 6,720
  5. 2016Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networkscited by 2,998
  6. 2019Certified Adversarial Robustness via Randomized Smoothingcited by 1,340
  7. 2019Adversarial Examples Are Not Bugs, They Are Featurescited by 953
  8. 2017Reluplex: An Efficient SMT Solver for Verifying Deep Neural Networkscited by 744
  9. 2016Safety Verification of Deep Neural Networkscited by 263
  10. 2018Formal Security Analysis of Neural Networks using Symbolic Intervalscited by 185
  11. 2016Measuring Neural Net Robustness with Constraintscited by 90
  12. 2018Evaluating Uncertainty Quantification in End-to-End Autonomous Driving Controlcited by 55
7 more
  1. 2018A Statistical Approach to Assessing Neural Network Robustnesscited by 54
  2. 2020An SMT-Based Approach for Verifying Binarized Neural Networkscited by 47
  3. 2019Robustness of Neural Networks: A Probabilistic and Practical Approachcited by 38
  4. 2020Parallelization Techniques for Verifying Neural Networkscited by 36
  5. 2020Verifying Recurrent Neural Networks using Invariant Inferencecited by 26
  6. 2018Verification of deep probabilistic modelscited by 8
  7. 2021Certification of embedded systems based on Machine Learning: A surveycited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 2; 2024: 3; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.

10 papers.