A Theoretical Study of The Effects of Adversarial Attacks on Sparse Regression
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This paper analyzes ℓ1 regularized linear regression under the challenging scenario of having only adversarially corrupted data for training. We use the primal-dual witness paradigm to provide provable performance guarantees for the support of the estimated regression parameter vector to match the actual parameter. Our theoretical analysis shows the counter-intuitive result that an adversary can influence sample complexity by corrupting the irrelevant features, i.e., those corresponding to zero coefficients of the regression parameter vector, which, consequently, do not affect the dependent variable. As any adversarially robust algorithm has its limitations, our theoretical analysis identifies the regimes under which the learning algorithm and adversary can dominate over each other. It helps us to analyze these fundamental limits and address critical scientific questions of which parameters (like mutual incoherence, the maximum and minimum eigenvalue of the covariance matrix, and the budget of adversarial perturbation) play a role in the high or low probability of success of the LASSO algorithm. Also, the derived sample complexity is logarithmic with respect to the size of the regression parameter vector, and our theoretical claims are validated by empirical analysis on synthetic and real-world datasets.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Dec 2022.
Builds on
23 of 42 references.
References · 23
- 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
- 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,326
- 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,114
- 2016Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networkscited by 2,976
- 2016Adversarial examples in the physical worldcited by 1,762
- 2019Certified Adversarial Robustness via Randomized Smoothingcited by 1,324
- 2017One pixel attack for fooling deep neural networkscited by 579
- 2017Provable defenses against adversarial examples via the convex outer adversarial polytopecited by 564
- 2019Unlabeled Data Improves Adversarial Robustnesscited by 415
- 2018Semidefinite relaxations for certifying robustness to adversarial examplescited by 178
- 2018Rademacher Complexity for Adversarially Robust Generalizationcited by 132
- 2019Adversarial Examples Are a Natural Consequence of Test Error in Noisecited by 114
11 more
- 2020Precise Tradeoffs in Adversarial Training for Linear Regressioncited by 76
- 2019Adversarially Robust Generalization Just Requires More Unlabeled Datacited by 75
- 2019Model Compression with Adversarial Robustness: A Unified Optimization Frameworkcited by 71
- 2020Adversarial Learning Guarantees for Linear Hypotheses and Neural Networkscited by 47
- 2021Random Noise Defense Against Query-Based Black-Box Attackscited by 46
- 2020On the Generalization Properties of Adversarial Trainingcited by 23
- 2020Adversarially Robust Estimate and Risk Analysis in Linear Regressioncited by 22
- 2014Estimating Diffusion Network Structures: Recovery Conditions, Sample Complexity & Soft-thresholding Algorithmcited by 14
- 2019Adversarial regression training for visualizing the progression of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with chest x-rayscited by 6
- 2018Adversarial Regression with Multiple Learnerscited by 5
- 2019Provable Computational and Statistical Guarantees for Efficient Learning of Continuous-Action Graphical Gamescited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.