Regularization Helps with Mitigating Poisoning Attacks: Distributionally-Robust Machine Learning Using the Wasserstein Distance

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2001.10655v1
• Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 01:16:19 GMT
• Title: Regularization Helps with Mitigating Poisoning Attacks: Distributionally-Robust Machine Learning Using the Wasserstein Distance
• Authors: Farhad Farokhi
• Abstract summary: We use distributionally-robust optimization for machine learning to mitigate the effect of data poisoning attacks. We relax the distributionally-robust machine learning problem by finding an upper bound for the worst-case fitness.
• Score: 14.095523601311374
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: We use distributionally-robust optimization for machine learning to mitigate the effect of data poisoning attacks. We provide performance guarantees for the trained model on the original data (not including the poison records) by training the model for the worst-case distribution on a neighbourhood around the empirical distribution (extracted from the training dataset corrupted by a poisoning attack) defined using the Wasserstein distance. We relax the distributionally-robust machine learning problem by finding an upper bound for the worst-case fitness based on the empirical sampled-averaged fitness and the Lipschitz-constant of the fitness function (on the data for given model parameters) as regularizer. For regression models, we prove that this regularizer is equal to the dual norm of the model parameters. We use the Wine Quality dataset, the Boston Housing Market dataset, and the Adult dataset for demonstrating the results of this paper.

Related papers

• Rejection via Learning Density Ratios [50.91522897152437]
  Classification with rejection emerges as a learning paradigm which allows models to abstain from making predictions. We propose a different distributional perspective, where we seek to find an idealized data distribution which maximizes a pretrained model's performance. Our framework is tested empirically over clean and noisy datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T01:32:17Z)
• Quantifying Distribution Shifts and Uncertainties for Enhanced Model Robustness in Machine Learning Applications [0.0]
  This study explores model adaptation and generalization by utilizing synthetic data. We employ quantitative measures such as Kullback-Leibler divergence, Jensen-Shannon distance, and Mahalanobis distance to assess data similarity. Our findings suggest that utilizing statistical measures, such as the Mahalanobis distance, to determine whether model predictions fall within the low-error "interpolation regime" or the high-error "extrapolation regime" provides a complementary method for assessing distribution shift and model uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-03T10:05:31Z)
• Towards Theoretical Understandings of Self-Consuming Generative Models [56.84592466204185]
  This paper tackles the emerging challenge of training generative models within a self-consuming loop. We construct a theoretical framework to rigorously evaluate how this training procedure impacts the data distributions learned by future models. We present results for kernel density estimation, delivering nuanced insights such as the impact of mixed data training on error propagation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T02:08:09Z)
• Distributionally Robust Post-hoc Classifiers under Prior Shifts [31.237674771958165]
  We investigate the problem of training models that are robust to shifts caused by changes in the distribution of class-priors or group-priors. We present an extremely lightweight post-hoc approach that performs scaling adjustments to predictions from a pre-trained model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-16T00:54:57Z)
• Sampling Bias Correction for Supervised Machine Learning: A Bayesian Inference Approach with Practical Applications [0.0]
  We discuss a problem where a dataset might be subject to intentional sample bias such as label imbalance. We then apply this solution to binary logistic regression, and discuss scenarios where a dataset might be subject to intentional sample bias. This technique is widely applicable for statistical inference on big data, from the medical sciences to image recognition to marketing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-11T20:46:37Z)
• Leveraging Unlabeled Data to Predict Out-of-Distribution Performance [63.740181251997306]
  Real-world machine learning deployments are characterized by mismatches between the source (training) and target (test) distributions. In this work, we investigate methods for predicting the target domain accuracy using only labeled source data and unlabeled target data. We propose Average Thresholded Confidence (ATC), a practical method that learns a threshold on the model's confidence, predicting accuracy as the fraction of unlabeled examples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-11T23:01:12Z)
• Bayesian analysis of the prevalence bias: learning and predicting from imbalanced data [10.659348599372944]
  This paper lays the theoretical and computational framework for training models, and for prediction, in the presence of prevalence bias. It offers an alternative to principled training losses and complements test-time procedures based on selecting an operating point from summary curves. It integrates seamlessly in the current paradigm of (deep) learning using backpropagation and naturally with Bayesian models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-31T14:36:33Z)
• Evaluating State-of-the-Art Classification Models Against Bayes Optimality [106.50867011164584]
  We show that we can compute the exact Bayes error of generative models learned using normalizing flows. We use our approach to conduct a thorough investigation of state-of-the-art classification models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-07T06:21:20Z)
• Graph Embedding with Data Uncertainty [113.39838145450007]
  spectral-based subspace learning is a common data preprocessing step in many machine learning pipelines. Most subspace learning methods do not take into consideration possible measurement inaccuracies or artifacts that can lead to data with high uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-01T15:08:23Z)
• A Distributionally Robust Approach to Fair Classification [17.759493152879013]
  We propose a robust logistic regression model with an unfairness penalty that prevents discrimination with respect to sensitive attributes such as gender or ethnicity. This model is equivalent to a tractable convex optimization problem if a Wasserstein ball centered at the empirical distribution on the training data is used to model distributional uncertainty. We demonstrate that the resulting classifier improves fairness at a marginal loss of predictive accuracy on both synthetic and real datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-18T22:34:48Z)
• Good Classifiers are Abundant in the Interpolating Regime [64.72044662855612]
  We develop a methodology to compute precisely the full distribution of test errors among interpolating classifiers. We find that test errors tend to concentrate around a small typical value $varepsilon*$, which deviates substantially from the test error of worst-case interpolating model. Our results show that the usual style of analysis in statistical learning theory may not be fine-grained enough to capture the good generalization performance observed in practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-22T21:12:31Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.