Does simple trump complex? Comparing strategies for adversarial robustness in DNNs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) have shown substantial success in various applications but remain vulnerable to adversarial attacks. This study aims to identify and isolate the components of two different adversarial training techniques that contribute most to increased adversarial robustness, particularly through the lens of margins in the input space -- the minimal distance between data points and decision boundaries. Specifically, we compare two methods that maximize margins: a simple approach which modifies the loss function to increase an approximation of the margin, and a more complex state-of-the-art method (Dynamics-Aware Robust Training) which builds upon this approach. Using a VGG-16 model as our base, we systematically isolate and evaluate individual components from these methods to determine their relative impact on adversarial robustness. We assess the effect of each component on the model's performance under various adversarial attacks, including AutoAttack and Projected Gradient Descent (PGD). Our analysis on the CIFAR-10 dataset reveals which elements most effectively enhance adversarial robustness, providing insights for designing more robust DNNs.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Aug 2025.
Builds on
26 of 31 references.
References · 26
- 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,364
- 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,364
- 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,415
- 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,155
- 2016SGDR: Stochastic Gradient Descent with Warm Restartscited by 5,045
- 2016Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networkscited by 2,998
- 2018Group Normalizationcited by 1,524
- 2019Theoretically Principled Trade-off between Robustness and Accuracycited by 1,517
- 2020Reliable evaluation of adversarial robustness with an ensemble of diverse parameter-free attackscited by 1,451
- 2015DeepFool: a simple and accurate method to fool deep neural networkscited by 1,318
- 2018Averaging Weights Leads to Wider Optima and Better Generalizationcited by 1,209
- 2019Adversarial Examples Are Not Bugs, They Are Featurescited by 953
14 more
- 2018Robustness May Be at Odds with Accuracycited by 880
- 2019Square Attack: a query-efficient black-box adversarial attack via random searchcited by 685
- 2020RobustBench: a standardized adversarial robustness benchmarkcited by 661
- 2020Overfitting in adversarially robust deep learningcited by 506
- 2019Minimally distorted Adversarial Examples with a Fast Adaptive Boundary Attackcited by 334
- 2023Better Diffusion Models Further Improve Adversarial Trainingcited by 208
- 2020Geometry-aware Instance-reweighted Adversarial Trainingcited by 198
- 2021Data Augmentation Can Improve Robustnesscited by 194
- 2018MMA Training: Direct Input Space Margin Maximization through Adversarial Trainingcited by 172
- 2018Large Margin Deep Networks for Classificationcited by 112
- 2021Probabilistic Margins for Instance Reweighting in Adversarial Trainingcited by 57
- 2024Adversarial Robustness Limits via Scaling-Law and Human-Alignment Studiescited by 38
- 2023Exploring and Exploiting Decision Boundary Dynamics for Adversarial Robustnesscited by 36
- 2024MixedNUTS: Training-Free Accuracy-Robustness Balance via Nonlinearly Mixed Classifierscited by 16
Built on by
Not cited yet.