# Adversarial Robustness Overestimation and Instability in TRADES

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.07675 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.07675/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 35 of its 43 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 10 Oct 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 35)

- [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)
- [Intriguing properties of neural networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1312.6199/) (2013)
- [Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1608.04644/) (2016)
- [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)
- [Obfuscated Gradients Give a False Sense of Security: Circumventing Defenses to Adversarial Examples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.00420/) (2018)
- [Visualizing the Loss Landscape of Neural Nets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1712.09913/) (2017)
- [Adversarial Machine Learning at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1611.01236/) (2016)
- [Robustness May Be at Odds with Accuracy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.12152/) (2018)
- [A Convergence Theory for Deep Learning via Over-Parameterization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.03962/) (2018)
- [Square Attack: a query-efficient black-box adversarial attack via random search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.00049/) (2019)
- [RobustBench: a standardized adversarial robustness benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.09670/) (2020)
- [Overfitting in adversarially robust deep learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.11569/) (2020)
- [Minimally distorted Adversarial Examples with a Fast Adaptive Boundary Attack](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.02044/) (2019)
- [Uncovering the Limits of Adversarial Training against Norm-Bounded Adversarial Examples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.03593/) (2020)
- [Escaping From Saddle Points --- Online Stochastic Gradient for Tensor Decomposition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1503.02101/) (2015)
- [Attacks Which Do Not Kill Training Make Adversarial Learning Stronger](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.11242/) (2020)
- [Adversarial Logit Pairing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.06373/) (2018)
- [Bag of Tricks for Adversarial Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.00467/) (2020)
- [MMA Training: Direct Input Space Margin Maximization through Adversarial Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.02637/) (2018)
- [On the Convergence and Robustness of Adversarial Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.08304/) (2021)
- [Generalization Error Bounds of Gradient Descent for Learning Over-parameterized Deep ReLU Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.01384/) (2019)
- [On the Loss Landscape of Adversarial Training: Identifying Challenges and How to Overcome Them](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.08403/) (2020)
- [Exploring Memorization in Adversarial Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.01606/) (2021)
- [Enhancing Adversarial Training with Second-Order Statistics of Weights](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.06020/) (2022)
- [Random Smoothing Might be Unable to Certify ℓ_∞ Robustness for High-Dimensional Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.03517/) (2020)
- [Evaluating and Understanding the Robustness of Adversarial Logit Pairing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1807.10272/) (2018)
- [Randomized Adversarial Training via Taylor Expansion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.10653/) (2023)
- [Logit Pairing Methods Can Fool Gradient-Based Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.12042/) (2018)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Auto-ART: Structured Literature Synthesis and Automated Adversarial Robustness Testing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.20704/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This paper examines the phenomenon of probabilistic robustness overestimation in TRADES, a prominent adversarial training method. Our study reveals that TRADES sometimes yields disproportionately high PGD validation accuracy compared to the AutoAttack testing accuracy in the multiclass classification task. This discrepancy highlights a significant overestimation of robustness for these instances, potentially linked to gradient masking. We further analyze the parameters contributing to unstable models that lead to overestimation. Our findings indicate that smaller batch sizes, lower beta values (which control the weight of the robust loss term in TRADES), larger learning rates, and higher class complexity (e.g., CIFAR-100 versus CIFAR-10) are associated with an increased likelihood of robustness overestimation. By examining metrics such as the First-Order Stationary Condition (FOSC), inner-maximization, and gradient information, we identify the underlying cause of this phenomenon as gradient masking and provide insights into it. Furthermore, our experiments show that certain unstable training instances may return to a state without robust overestimation, inspiring our attempts at a solution. In addition to adjusting parameter settings to reduce instability or retraining when overestimation occurs, we recommend incorporating Gaussian noise in inputs when the FOSC score exceed the threshold. This method aims to mitigate robustness overestimation of TRADES and other similar methods at its source, ensuring more reliable representation of adversarial robustness during evaluation.