Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
139 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
47 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Adversarial Attacks Against Uncertainty Quantification (2309.10586v1)

Published 19 Sep 2023 in cs.CV, cs.CR, and cs.LG

Abstract: Machine-learning models can be fooled by adversarial examples, i.e., carefully-crafted input perturbations that force models to output wrong predictions. While uncertainty quantification has been recently proposed to detect adversarial inputs, under the assumption that such attacks exhibit a higher prediction uncertainty than pristine data, it has been shown that adaptive attacks specifically aimed at reducing also the uncertainty estimate can easily bypass this defense mechanism. In this work, we focus on a different adversarial scenario in which the attacker is still interested in manipulating the uncertainty estimate, but regardless of the correctness of the prediction; in particular, the goal is to undermine the use of machine-learning models when their outputs are consumed by a downstream module or by a human operator. Following such direction, we: \textit{(i)} design a threat model for attacks targeting uncertainty quantification; \textit{(ii)} devise different attack strategies on conceptually different UQ techniques spanning for both classification and semantic segmentation problems; \textit{(iii)} conduct a first complete and extensive analysis to compare the differences between some of the most employed UQ approaches under attack. Our extensive experimental analysis shows that our attacks are more effective in manipulating uncertainty quantification measures than attacks aimed to also induce misclassifications.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (25)
  1. Evasion attacks against machine learning at test time. In H. Blockeel, K. Kersting, S. Nijssen, and F. Železný, editors, Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases (ECML PKDD), Part III, volume 8190 of LNCS, pages 387–402. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013.
  2. B. Biggio and F. Roli. Wild patterns: Ten years after the rise of adversarial machine learning. Pattern Recognition, 84:317–331, 2018.
  3. Weight uncertainty in neural networks. CoRR, abs/1505.05424, 2015.
  4. N. Carlini and D. A. Wagner. Adversarial examples are not easily detected: Bypassing ten detection methods. In B. Thuraisingham, B. Biggio, D. M. Freeman, B. Miller, and A. Sinha, editors, Proceedings of the 10th ACM Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Security, AISec@CCS 2017, Dallas, TX, USA, November 3, 2017, pages 3–14. ACM, 2017.
  5. N. Carlini and D. A. Wagner. Towards evaluating the robustness of neural networks. In 2017 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, SP 2017, San Jose, CA, USA, May 22-26, 2017, pages 39–57. IEEE Computer Society, 2017.
  6. The pascal visual object classes challenge: A retrospective. International Journal of Computer Vision, 111(1):98–136, Jan. 2015.
  7. Detecting adversarial samples from artifacts. CoRR, abs/1703.00410, 2017.
  8. Y. Gal and Z. Ghahramani. Dropout as a bayesian approximation: Representing model uncertainty in deep learning. In M. Balcan and K. Q. Weinberger, editors, Proceedings of the 33nd International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2016, New York City, NY, USA, June 19-24, 2016, volume 48 of JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings, pages 1050–1059. JMLR.org, 2016.
  9. Concrete dropout. In I. Guyon, U. von Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. M. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. V. N. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2017, December 4-9, 2017, Long Beach, CA, USA, pages 3581–3590, 2017.
  10. Explaining and harnessing adversarial examples. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2015.
  11. The limitations of model uncertainty in adversarial settings. CoRR, abs/1812.02606, 2018.
  12. E. Hüllermeier and W. Waegeman. Aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty in machine learning: an introduction to concepts and methods. Mach. Learn., 110(3):457–506, 2021.
  13. A. Kendall and Y. Gal. What uncertainties do we need in bayesian deep learning for computer vision? In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS’17, page 5580–5590, Red Hook, NY, USA, 2017. Curran Associates Inc.
  14. Learnable uncertainty under laplace approximations. In C. P. de Campos, M. H. Maathuis, and E. Quaeghebeur, editors, Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, UAI 2021, Virtual Event, 27-30 July 2021, volume 161 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 344–353. AUAI Press, 2021.
  15. Simple and scalable predictive uncertainty estimation using deep ensembles. In I. Guyon, U. von Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. M. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. V. N. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2017, December 4-9, 2017, Long Beach, CA, USA, pages 6402–6413, 2017.
  16. Dropout injection at test time for post hoc uncertainty quantification in neural networks. Information Sciences, 645:119356, 2023.
  17. Simple and principled uncertainty estimation with deterministic deep learning via distance awareness. In H. Larochelle, M. Ranzato, R. Hadsell, M. Balcan, and H. Lin, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2020, NeurIPS 2020, December 6-12, 2020, virtual, 2020.
  18. Fully convolutional networks for semantic segmentation. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2015, Boston, MA, USA, June 7-12, 2015, pages 3431–3440. IEEE Computer Society, 2015.
  19. A general framework for uncertainty estimation in deep learning. IEEE Robotics Autom. Lett., 5(2):3153–3160, 2020.
  20. D. J. C. MacKay. A practical bayesian framework for backpropagation networks. Neural Comput., 4(3):448–472, 1992.
  21. Towards deep learning models resistant to adversarial attacks. In ICLR, 2018.
  22. Deep deterministic uncertainty: A simple baseline. arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.11582, 2021.
  23. L. Smith and Y. Gal. Understanding measures of uncertainty for adversarial example detection. In A. Globerson and R. Silva, editors, Proceedings of the Thirty-Fourth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, UAI 2018, Monterey, California, USA, August 6-10, 2018, pages 560–569. AUAI Press, 2018.
  24. Intriguing properties of neural networks, Feb. 2014. Number: arXiv:1312.6199 arXiv:1312.6199 [cs].
  25. Uncertainty estimation using a single deep deterministic neural network. 2020.
Citations (2)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.