mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Tightening the Approximation Error of Adversarial Risk with Auto Loss Function Search

arXiv 2111.05063 ↗First posted 9 Nov 2021cs.LG cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Despite achieving great success, Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) are vulnerable to adversarial examples. How to accurately evaluate the adversarial robustness of DNNs is critical for their deployment in real-world applications. An ideal indicator of robustness is adversarial risk. Unfortunately, since it involves maximizing the 0-1 loss, calculating the true risk is technically intractable. The most common solution for this is to compute an approximate risk by replacing the 0-1 loss with a surrogate one. Some functions have been used, such as Cross-Entropy (CE) loss and Difference of Logits Ratio (DLR) loss. However, these functions are all manually designed and may not be well suited for adversarial robustness evaluation. In this paper, we leverage AutoML to tighten the error (gap) between the true and approximate risks. Our main contributions are as follows. First, AutoLoss-AR, the first method to search for surrogate losses for adversarial risk, with an elaborate search space, is proposed. The experimental results on 10 adversarially trained models demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method: the risks evaluated using the best-discovered losses are 0.2% to 1.6% better than those evaluated using the handcrafted baselines. Second, 5 surrogate losses with clean and readable formulas are distilled out and tested on 7 unseen adversarially trained models. These losses outperform the baselines by 0.8% to 2.4%, indicating that they can be used individually as some kind of new knowledge. Besides, the possible reasons for the better performance of these losses are explored.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 56 of its 82 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Nov 2021.

Builds on

56 of 82 references.

References · 56

  1. 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
  2. 2015Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shiftcited by 6,979
  3. 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,326
  4. 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,114
  5. 2014Fully Convolutional Networks for Semantic Segmentationcited by 4,845
  6. 2016Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networkscited by 2,976
  7. 2015Fast R-CNNcited by 2,930
  8. 2019Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbationscited by 2,857
  9. 2019Theoretically Principled Trade-off between Robustness and Accuracycited by 1,510
  10. 2016Neural Architecture Search with Reinforcement Learningcited by 1,489
  11. 2020Reliable evaluation of adversarial robustness with an ensemble of diverse parameter-free attackscited by 1,442
  12. 2015DeepFool: a simple and accurate method to fool deep neural networkscited by 1,315
38 more
  1. 2018Obfuscated Gradients Give a False Sense of Security: Circumventing Defenses to Adversarial Examplescited by 1,259
  2. 2016Adversarial Machine Learning at Scalecited by 934
  3. 2016Practical Black-Box Attacks against Machine Learningcited by 893
  4. 2017Ensemble Adversarial Training: Attacks and Defensescited by 833
  5. 2020Fast is better than free: Revisiting adversarial trainingcited by 723
  6. 2019Adversarial Training for Free!cited by 638
  7. 2013Network In Networkcited by 600
  8. 2017One pixel attack for fooling deep neural networkscited by 579
  9. 2020On Adaptive Attacks to Adversarial Example Defensescited by 547
  10. 2017Countering Adversarial Images using Input Transformationscited by 517
  11. 2020Overfitting in adversarially robust deep learningcited by 504
  12. 2017Feature Squeezing: Detecting Adversarial Examples in Deep Neural Networkscited by 484
  13. 2019On Evaluating Adversarial Robustnesscited by 442
  14. 2018Efficient Neural Network Robustness Certification with General Activation Functionscited by 439
  15. 2018Generating Natural Language Adversarial Examplescited by 422
  16. 2019Unlabeled Data Improves Adversarial Robustnesscited by 415
  17. 2019A Survey of Deep Learning Techniques for Autonomous Drivingcited by 401
  18. 2019AutoML: A Survey of the State-of-the-Artcited by 388
  19. 2019Using Pre-Training Can Improve Model Robustness and Uncertaintycited by 373
  20. 2018Towards Fast Computation of Certified Robustness for ReLU Networkscited by 254
  21. 2020Attacks Which Do Not Kill Training Make Adversarial Learning Strongercited by 242
  22. 2017Improving the Adversarial Robustness and Interpretability of Deep Neural Networks by Regularizing their Input Gradientscited by 236
  23. 2018Adversarial Risk and the Dangers of Evaluating Against Weak Attackscited by 221
  24. 2018Spatially Transformed Adversarial Examplescited by 195
  25. 2017Formal Guarantees on the Robustness of a Classifier against Adversarial Manipulationcited by 182
  26. 2019Adversarial Training and Robustness for Multiple Perturbationscited by 182
  27. 2018Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networks: An Extreme Value Theory Approachcited by 181
  28. 2019You Only Propagate Once: Accelerating Adversarial Training via Maximal Principlecited by 181
  29. 2018Constructing Unrestricted Adversarial Examples with Generative Modelscited by 135
  30. 2020Self-Adaptive Training: beyond Empirical Risk Minimizationcited by 126
  31. 2020Learnable Boundary Guided Adversarial Trainingcited by 93
  32. 2018GenAttack: Practical Black-box Attacks with Gradient-Free Optimizationcited by 82
  33. 2017Exploring the Landscape of Spatial Robustnesscited by 81
  34. 2015Analysis of classifiers' robustness to adversarial perturbationscited by 76
  35. 2019Cold Case: The Lost MNIST Digitscited by 61
  36. 2018Bilateral Adversarial Training: Towards Fast Training of More Robust Models Against Adversarial Attackscited by 48
  37. 2018ADef: an Iterative Algorithm to Construct Adversarial Deformationscited by 38
  38. 2019AM-LFS: AutoML for Loss Function Searchcited by 29

50 most cited of 56 All 56 (JSON)

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 1.

3 papers.