# Hazards in Deep Learning Testing: Prevalence, Impact and Recommendations

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.05381 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.05381/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 43 of its 60 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 11 Sep 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 43)

- [The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metric](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1801.03924/) (2018)
- [Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1412.6572/) (2014)
- [Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.06083/) (2017)
- [mixup: Beyond Empirical Risk Minimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1710.09412/) (2017)
- [CutMix: Regularization Strategy to Train Strong Classifiers with Localizable Features](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.04899/) (2019)
- [Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1903.12261/) (2019)
- [Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.10902/) (2019)
- [RandAugment: Practical automated data augmentation with a reduced search space](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.13719/) (2019)
- [The Many Faces of Robustness: A Critical Analysis of Out-of-Distribution Generalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.16241/) (2020)
- [Theoretically Principled Trade-off between Robustness and Accuracy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.08573/) (2019)
- [Reliable evaluation of adversarial robustness with an ensemble of diverse parameter-free attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.01690/) (2020)
- [Certified Adversarial Robustness via Randomized Smoothing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.02918/) (2019)
- [Averaging Weights Leads to Wider Optima and Better Generalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05407/) (2018)
- [AugMix: A Simple Data Processing Method to Improve Robustness and Uncertainty](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.02781/) (2019)
- [Robustness May Be at Odds with Accuracy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.12152/) (2018)
- [AutoAugment: Learning Augmentation Policies from Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.09501/) (2018)
- [RobustBench: a standardized adversarial robustness benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.09670/) (2020)
- [Adversarial Training for Free!](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.12843/) (2019)
- [On Adaptive Attacks to Adversarial Example Defenses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.08347/) (2020)
- [On Evaluating Adversarial Robustness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.06705/) (2019)
- [Unlabeled Data Improves Adversarial Robustness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.13736/) (2019)
- [DeepXplore: Automated Whitebox Testing of Deep Learning Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.06640/) (2017)
- [Improving Robustness using Generated Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.09468/) (2021)
- [Machine Learning Testing: Survey, Landscapes and Horizons](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.10742/) (2019)
- [Adversarial Robustness Toolbox v1.0.0](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1807.01069/) (2018)
- [Fixing Data Augmentation to Improve Adversarial Robustness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.01946/) (2021)
- [Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networks: An Extreme Value Theory Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1801.10578/) (2018)
- [Torchattacks: A PyTorch Repository for Adversarial Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.01950/) (2020)
- [Efficient Deep Learning: A Survey on Making Deep Learning Models Smaller, Faster, and Better](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.08962/) (2021)
- [Adversarial Robustness: From Self-Supervised Pre-Training to Fine-Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.12862/) (2020)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Much research on Machine Learning testing relies on empirical studies that evaluate and show their potential. However, in this context empirical results are sensitive to a number of parameters that can adversely impact the results of the experiments and potentially lead to wrong conclusions (Type I errors, i.e., incorrectly rejecting the Null Hypothesis). To this end, we survey the related literature and identify 10 commonly adopted empirical evaluation hazards that may significantly impact experimental results. We then perform a sensitivity analysis on 30 influential studies that were published in top-tier SE venues, against our hazard set and demonstrate their criticality. Our findings indicate that all 10 hazards we identify have the potential to invalidate experimental findings, such as those made by the related literature, and should be handled properly. Going a step further, we propose a point set of 10 good empirical practices that has the potential to mitigate the impact of the hazards. We believe our work forms the first step towards raising awareness of the common pitfalls and good practices within the software engineering community and hopefully contribute towards setting particular expectations for empirical research in the field of deep learning testing.