mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Benchmarking Robustness of Deep Learning Classifiers Using Two-Factor Perturbation

arXiv 2203.01323 ↗First posted 2 Mar 2022cs.CV cs.AI cs.GRcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Accuracies of deep learning (DL) classifiers are often unstable in that they may change significantly when retested on adversarial images, imperfect images, or perturbed images. This paper adds to the fundamental body of work on benchmarking the robustness of DL classifiers on defective images. To measure robust DL classifiers, previous research reported on single-factor corruption. We created comprehensive 69 benchmarking image sets, including a clean set, sets with single factor perturbations, and sets with two-factor perturbation conditions. The state-of-the-art two-factor perturbation includes (a) two digital perturbations (salt & pepper noise and Gaussian noise) applied in both sequences, and (b) one digital perturbation (salt & pepper noise) and a geometric perturbation (rotation) applied in both sequences. Previous research evaluating DL classifiers has often used top-1/top-5 accuracy. We innovate a new two-dimensional, statistical matrix to evaluating robustness of DL classifiers. Also, we introduce a new visualization tool, including minimum accuracy, maximum accuracy, mean accuracies, and coefficient of variation (CV), for benchmarking robustness of DL classifiers. Comparing with single factor corruption, we first report that using two-factor perturbed images improves both robustness and accuracy of DL classifiers. All source codes and related image sets are shared on the Website at http://cslinux.semo.edu/david/data to support future academic research and industry projects.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Mar 2022.

Builds on

15 of 34 references.

References · 15

  1. 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,326
  2. 2019Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbationscited by 2,857
  3. 2016Adversarial Machine Learning at Scalecited by 934
  4. 2017Adversarial Examples Are Not Easily Detected: Bypassing Ten Detection Methodscited by 542
  5. 2018Adversarial Robustness Toolbox v1.0.0cited by 214
  6. 2019Towards Stable and Efficient Training of Verifiably Robust Neural Networkscited by 204
  7. 2016Improving the Robustness of Deep Neural Networks via Stability Trainingcited by 156
  8. 2016Understanding How Image Quality Affects Deep Neural Networkscited by 118
  9. 2017A Study and Comparison of Human and Deep Learning Recognition Performance Under Visual Distortionscited by 107
  10. 2018Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Surface Variationscited by 99
  11. 2016Examining the Impact of Blur on Recognition by Convolutional Networkscited by 58
  12. 2017Google's Cloud Vision API Is Not Robust To Noisecited by 37
3 more
  1. 2017Comparing deep neural networks against humans: object recognition when the signal gets weakercited by 34
  2. 2017Quality Resilient Deep Neural Networkscited by 12
  3. 2018Improving Data Quality through Deep Learning and Statistical Modelscited by 6

Built on by

Not cited yet.