mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Generating and Detecting True Ambiguity: A Forgotten Danger in DNN Supervision Testing

arXiv 2207.10495 ↗First posted 21 Jul 2022cs.SE cs.LGcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) are becoming a crucial component of modern software systems, but they are prone to fail under conditions that are different from the ones observed during training (out-of-distribution inputs) or on inputs that are truly ambiguous, i.e., inputs that admit multiple classes with nonzero probability in their labels. Recent work proposed DNN supervisors to detect high-uncertainty inputs before their possible misclassification leads to any harm. To test and compare the capabilities of DNN supervisors, researchers proposed test generation techniques, to focus the testing effort on high-uncertainty inputs that should be recognized as anomalous by supervisors. However, existing test generators aim to produce out-of-distribution inputs. No existing model- and supervisor independent technique targets the generation of truly ambiguous test inputs, i.e., inputs that admit multiple classes according to expert human judgment. In this paper, we propose a novel way to generate ambiguous inputs to test DNN supervisors and used it to empirically compare several existing supervisor techniques. In particular, we propose AmbiGuess to generate ambiguous samples for image classification problems. AmbiGuess is based on gradient-guided sampling in the latent space of a regularized adversarial autoencoder. Moreover, we conducted what is -- to the best of our knowledge -- the most extensive comparative study of DNN supervisors, considering their capabilities to detect 4 distinct types of high-uncertainty inputs, including truly ambiguous ones. We find that the tested supervisors' capabilities are complementary: Those best suited to detect true ambiguity perform worse on invalid, out-of-distribution and adversarial inputs and vice-versa.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 42 of its 75 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Jul 2022.

Builds on

42 of 75 references.

References · 42

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  2. 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,364
  3. 2016Densely Connected Convolutional Networkscited by 6,720
  4. 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,415
  5. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,448
  6. 2017Fashion-MNIST: a Novel Image Dataset for Benchmarking Machine Learning Algorithmscited by 4,349
  7. 2013Auto-Encoding Variational Bayescited by 4,053
  8. 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,926
  9. 2019Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbationscited by 2,877
  10. 2016A Baseline for Detecting Misclassified and Out-of-Distribution Examples in Neural Networkscited by 2,385
  11. 2016Adversarial examples in the physical worldcited by 1,769
  12. 2015DeepFool: a simple and accurate method to fool deep neural networkscited by 1,318
30 more
  1. 2021Datasets: A Community Library for Natural Language Processingcited by 530
  2. 2015Adversarial Autoencoderscited by 364
  3. 2017DeepTest: Automated Testing of Deep-Neural-Network-driven Autonomous Carscited by 251
  4. 2017Explainable Artificial Intelligence: Understanding, Visualizing and Interpreting Deep Learning Modelscited by 206
  5. 2019MNIST-C: A Robustness Benchmark for Computer Visioncited by 138
  6. 2021Advances in adversarial attacks and defenses in computer vision: A surveycited by 127
  7. 2018Guiding Deep Learning System Testing using Surprise Adequacycited by 124
  8. 2019Taxonomy of Real Faults in Deep Learning Systemscited by 90
  9. 2021On Feature Collapse and Deep Kernel Learning for Single Forward Pass Uncertaintycited by 87
  10. 2019Estimating Risk and Uncertainty in Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 70
  11. 2018TensorFuzz: Debugging Neural Networks with Coverage-Guided Fuzzingcited by 68
  12. 2019Misbehaviour Prediction for Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 55
  13. 2020Model-based Exploration of the Frontier of Behaviours for Deep Learning System Testingcited by 40
  14. 2019Characterizing the Decision Boundary of Deep Neural Networkscited by 32
  15. 2022Simple Techniques Work Surprisingly Well for Neural Network Test Prioritization and Active Learning (Replicability Study)cited by 27
  16. 2020Towards Characterizing Adversarial Defects of Deep Learning Software from the Lens of Uncertaintycited by 26
  17. 2020Reducing DNN Labelling Cost using Surprise Adequacy: An Industrial Case Study for Autonomous Drivingcited by 22
  18. 2021Distribution-Aware Testing of Neural Networks Using Generative Modelscited by 22
  19. 2019Towards Structured Evaluation of Deep Neural Network Supervisorscited by 19
  20. 2021DeepGuard: A Framework for Safeguarding Autonomous Driving Systems from Inconsistent Behaviorcited by 17
  21. 2020SINVAD: Search-based Image Space Navigation for DNN Image Classifier Test Input Generationcited by 15
  22. 2020The Hidden Uncertainty in a Neural Networks Activationscited by 14
  23. 2021Fail-Safe Execution of Deep Learning based Systems through Uncertainty Monitoringcited by 11
  24. 2021Exposing Previously Undetectable Faults in Deep Neural Networkscited by 11
  25. 2021Prediction Surface Uncertainty Quantification in Object Detection Models for Autonomous Drivingcited by 10
  26. 2020Uncertainty-Wizard: Fast and User-Friendly Neural Network Uncertainty Quantificationcited by 9
  27. 2021A Review and Refinement of Surprise Adequacycited by 9
  28. 2021Performance Analysis of Out-of-Distribution Detection on Various Trained Neural Networkscited by 9
  29. 2020Manifold for Machine Learning Assurancecited by 5
  30. 2021A Review on Oracle Issues in Machine Learningcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 4; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

8 papers.