mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

A Comprehensive Assessment Benchmark for Rigorously Evaluating Deep Learning Image Classifiers

arXiv 2308.04137 ↗First posted 8 Aug 2023cs.LG cs.CVcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Reliable and robust evaluation methods are a necessary first step towards developing machine learning models that are themselves robust and reliable. Unfortunately, current evaluation protocols typically used to assess classifiers fail to comprehensively evaluate performance as they tend to rely on limited types of test data, and ignore others. For example, using the standard test data fails to evaluate the predictions made by the classifier to samples from classes it was not trained on. On the other hand, testing with data containing samples from unknown classes fails to evaluate how well the classifier can predict the labels for known classes. This article advocates benchmarking performance using a wide range of different types of data and using a single metric that can be applied to all such data types to produce a consistent evaluation of performance. Using the proposed benchmark it is found that current deep neural networks, including those trained with methods that are believed to produce state-of-the-art robustness, are vulnerable to making mistakes on certain types of data. This means that such models will be unreliable in real-world scenarios where they may encounter data from many different domains, and that they are insecure as they can be easily fooled into making the wrong decisions. It is hoped that these results will motivate the wider adoption of more comprehensive testing methods that will, in turn, lead to the development of more robust machine learning methods in the future. Code is available at: https://codeberg.org/mwspratling/RobustnessEvaluation

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 92 of its 131 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Aug 2023.

Builds on

92 of 131 references.

References · 92

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  2. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,305
  3. 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,498
  4. 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,364
  5. 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,415
  6. 2017mixup: Beyond Empirical Risk Minimizationcited by 5,183
  7. 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,155
  8. 2017Fashion-MNIST: a Novel Image Dataset for Benchmarking Machine Learning Algorithmscited by 4,349
  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. 2013Describing Textures in the Wildcited by 2,125
  12. 2020Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 1,969
38 more
  1. 2020The Many Faces of Robustness: A Critical Analysis of Out-of-Distribution Generalizationcited by 1,850
  2. 2016Adversarial examples in the physical worldcited by 1,769
  3. 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,642
  4. 2019Theoretically Principled Trade-off between Robustness and Accuracycited by 1,517
  5. 2019Do ImageNet Classifiers Generalize to ImageNet?cited by 1,515
  6. 2020Reliable evaluation of adversarial robustness with an ensemble of diverse parameter-free attackscited by 1,451
  7. 2018ImageNet-trained CNNs are biased towards texture; increasing shape bias improves accuracy and robustnesscited by 1,432
  8. 2019Natural Adversarial Examplescited by 1,408
  9. 2020Energy-based Out-of-distribution Detectioncited by 1,299
  10. 2017Deeper, Broader and Artier Domain Generalizationcited by 986
  11. 2019Adversarial Examples Are Not Bugs, They Are Featurescited by 953
  12. 2018Deep Anomaly Detection with Outlier Exposurecited by 942
  13. 2019AugMix: A Simple Data Processing Method to Improve Robustness and Uncertaintycited by 901
  14. 2018Robustness May Be at Odds with Accuracycited by 880
  15. 2021Generalized Out-of-Distribution Detection: A Surveycited by 802
  16. 2015The Limitations of Deep Learning in Adversarial Settingscited by 790
  17. 2014Deep Neural Networks are Easily Fooled: High Confidence Predictions for Unrecognizable Imagescited by 776
  18. 2020RobustBench: a standardized adversarial robustness benchmarkcited by 661
  19. 2019Using Self-Supervised Learning Can Improve Model Robustness and Uncertaintycited by 514
  20. 2018Threat of Adversarial Attacks on Deep Learning in Computer Vision: A Surveycited by 460
  21. 2018Deep Learning for Classical Japanese Literaturecited by 422
  22. 2017Wild Patterns: Ten Years After the Rise of Adversarial Machine Learningcited by 414
  23. 2019Unmasking Clever Hans Predictors and Assessing What Machines Really Learncited by 365
  24. 2021Open-Set Recognition: a Good Closed-Set Classifier is All You Need?cited by 353
  25. 2019Benchmarking Robustness in Object Detection: Autonomous Driving when Winter is Comingcited by 336
  26. 2022OpenOOD: Benchmarking Generalized Out-of-Distribution Detectioncited by 268
  27. 2018Generalisation in humans and deep neural networkscited by 237
  28. 2019Adversarial Attacks and Defenses in Images, Graphs and Text: A Reviewcited by 237
  29. 2018Adversarial Logit Pairingcited by 224
  30. 2023Better Diffusion Models Further Improve Adversarial Trainingcited by 208
  31. 2018Do CIFAR-10 Classifiers Generalize to CIFAR-10?cited by 200
  32. 2020Bag of Tricks for Adversarial Trainingcited by 200
  33. 2020The Next Decade in AI: Four Steps Towards Robust Artificial Intelligencecited by 195
  34. 2021Data Augmentation Can Improve Robustnesscited by 194
  35. 2020The Computational Limits of Deep Learningcited by 193
  36. 2023OpenOOD v1.5: Enhanced Benchmark for Out-of-Distribution Detectioncited by 179
  37. 2020Torchattacks: A PyTorch Repository for Adversarial Attackscited by 158
  38. 2019MNIST-C: A Robustness Benchmark for Computer Visioncited by 138

50 most cited of 92 All 92 (JSON)

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.