mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

PROSAC: Provably Safe Certification for Machine Learning Models under Adversarial Attacks

arXiv 2402.02629 ↗First posted 4 Feb 2024cs.LG cs.CRcited by 11

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

It is widely known that state-of-the-art machine learning models, including vision and language models, can be seriously compromised by adversarial perturbations. It is therefore increasingly relevant to develop capabilities to certify their performance in the presence of the most effective adversarial attacks. Our paper offers a new approach to certify the performance of machine learning models in the presence of adversarial attacks with population level risk guarantees. In particular, we introduce the notion of (α,zeta)-safe machine learning model. We propose a hypothesis testing procedure, based on the availability of a calibration set, to derive statistical guarantees providing that the probability of declaring that the adversarial (population) risk of a machine learning model is less than α (i.e. the model is safe), while the model is in fact unsafe (i.e. the model adversarial population risk is higher than α), is less than zeta. We also propose Bayesian optimization algorithms to determine efficiently whether a machine learning model is (α,zeta)-safe in the presence of an adversarial attack, along with statistical guarantees. We apply our framework to a range of machine learning models - including various sizes of vision Transformer (ViT) and ResNet models - impaired by a variety of adversarial attacks, such as PGDAttack, MomentumAttack, GenAttack and BanditAttack, to illustrate the operation of our approach. Importantly, we show that ViT's are generally more robust to adversarial attacks than ResNets, and large models are generally more robust than smaller models. Our approach goes beyond existing empirical adversarial risk-based certification guarantees. It formulates rigorous (and provable) performance guarantees that can be used to satisfy regulatory requirements mandating the use of state-of-the-art technical tools.

Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 42 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Feb 2024.

Builds on

42 of 52 references.

References · 42

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  3. 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 29,915
  4. 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,326
  5. 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,114
  6. 2016Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networkscited by 2,976
  7. 2020Reliable evaluation of adversarial robustness with an ensemble of diverse parameter-free attackscited by 1,442
  8. 2019Certified Adversarial Robustness via Randomized Smoothingcited by 1,324
  9. 2019Square Attack: a query-efficient black-box adversarial attack via random searchcited by 682
  10. 2017Provable defenses against adversarial examples via the convex outer adversarial polytopecited by 564
  11. 2018Black-box Adversarial Attacks with Limited Queries and Informationcited by 499
  12. 2018Certified Robustness to Adversarial Examples with Differential Privacycited by 462
30 more
  1. 2017On Kernelized Multi-armed Banditscited by 348
  2. 2019Minimally distorted Adversarial Examples with a Fast Adaptive Boundary Attackcited by 333
  3. 2019HopSkipJumpAttack: A Query-Efficient Decision-Based Attackcited by 328
  4. 2019Provably Robust Deep Learning via Adversarially Trained Smoothed Classifierscited by 328
  5. 2018On the Effectiveness of Interval Bound Propagation for Training Verifiably Robust Modelscited by 322
  6. 2020Do Adversarially Robust ImageNet Models Transfer Better?cited by 315
  7. 2021Distribution-Free, Risk-Controlling Prediction Setscited by 278
  8. 2018Adversarial Attacks and Defences: A Surveycited by 259
  9. 2021Learn then Test: Calibrating Predictive Algorithms to Achieve Risk Controlcited by 256
  10. 2021Understanding Robustness of Transformers for Image Classificationcited by 250
  11. 2019Towards Stable and Efficient Training of Verifiably Robust Neural Networkscited by 204
  12. 2018Lipschitz-Margin Training: Scalable Certification of Perturbation Invariance for Deep Neural Networkscited by 193
  13. 2017Formal Guarantees on the Robustness of a Classifier against Adversarial Manipulationcited by 182
  14. 2023Conformal Language Modelingcited by 163
  15. 2018Scaling provable adversarial defensescited by 141
  16. 2022(Certified!!) Adversarial Robustness for Free!cited by 130
  17. 2021Globally-Robust Neural Networkscited by 106
  18. 2021Orthogonalizing Convolutional Layers with the Cayley Transformcited by 105
  19. 2021On the Adversarial Robustness of Vision Transformerscited by 104
  20. 2020SoK: Certified Robustness for Deep Neural Networkscited by 100
  21. 2020Do Wider Neural Networks Really Help Adversarial Robustness?cited by 79
  22. 2021Skew Orthogonal Convolutionscited by 67
  23. 2019FlipTest: Fairness Testing via Optimal Transportcited by 51
  24. 2022LOT: Layer-wise Orthogonal Training on Improving ℓ2 Certified Robustnesscited by 32
  25. 2020A Statistical Test for Probabilistic Fairnesscited by 25
  26. 2021Boosting the Certified Robustness of L-infinity Distance Netscited by 24
  27. 2023Auditing Fairness by Bettingcited by 24
  28. 2021Testing Group Fairness via Optimal Transport Projectionscited by 23
  29. 2022Efficiently Controlling Multiple Risks with Pareto Testingcited by 21
  30. 2020Auditing ML Models for Individual Bias and Unfairnesscited by 18

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 10.

11 papers.