Adversarial Samples Are Not Created Equal
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Over the past decade, numerous theories have been proposed to explain the widespread vulnerability of deep neural networks to adversarial evasion attacks. Among these, the theory of non-robust features proposed by Ilyas et al. has been widely accepted, showing that brittle but predictive features of the data distribution can be directly exploited by attackers. However, this theory overlooks adversarial samples that do not directly utilize these features. In this work, we advocate that these two kinds of samples - those which use use brittle but predictive features and those that do not - comprise two types of adversarial weaknesses and should be differentiated when evaluating adversarial robustness. For this purpose, we propose an ensemble-based metric to measure the manipulation of non-robust features by adversarial perturbations and use this metric to analyze the makeup of adversarial samples generated by attackers. This new perspective also allows us to re-examine multiple phenomena, including the impact of sharpness-aware minimization on adversarial robustness and the robustness gap observed between adversarially training and standard training on robust datasets.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jan 2026.
Builds on
25 of 31 references.
References · 25
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
- 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,326
- 2020Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 1,928
- 2019Adversarial Examples Are Not Bugs, They Are Featurescited by 950
- 2020The Pitfalls of Simplicity Bias in Neural Networkscited by 349
- 2020Gradient Starvation: A Learning Proclivity in Neural Networkscited by 262
- 2016A Boundary Tilting Persepective on the Phenomenon of Adversarial Examplescited by 70
- 2022Boosting the Transferability of Adversarial Attacks with Reverse Adversarial Perturbationcited by 67
- 2022Can Neural Nets Learn the Same Model Twice? Investigating Reproducibility and Double Descent from the Decision Boundary Perspectivecited by 57
- 2021Fast Minimum-norm Adversarial Attacks through Adaptive Norm Constraintscited by 50
- 2023Boosting Adversarial Transferability by Achieving Flat Local Maximacited by 48
13 more
- 2025PolyPythias: Stability and Outliers across Fifty Language Model Pre-Training Runscited by 33
- 2024On the Duality Between Sharpness-Aware Minimization and Adversarial Trainingcited by 24
- 2018Non-Negative Networks Against Adversarial Attackscited by 20
- 2023On the Variance of Neural Network Training with respect to Test Sets and Distributionscited by 20
- 2022Can we achieve robustness from data alone?cited by 16
- 2023Adversarial Examples Are Not Real Featurescited by 16
- 2018Adversarial Attacks, Regression, and Numerical Stability Regularizationcited by 14
- 2019Robust Design of Deep Neural Networks against Adversarial Attacks based on Lyapunov Theorycited by 13
- 2021Adversarial Transfer Attacks With Unknown Data and Class Overlapcited by 8
- 2021Adversarial Perturbations Are Not So Weird: Entanglement of Robust and Non-Robust Features in Neural Network Classifierscited by 7
- 2023You Don't Need Robust Machine Learning to Manage Adversarial Attack Riskscited by 3
- 2025Stop Walking in Circles! Bailing Out Early in Projected Gradient Descentcited by 2
- 2025Adversarial Machine Learning Attacks on Financial Reporting via Maximum Violated Multi-Objective Attackcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.