Reachable Sets of Classifiers and Regression Models: (Non-)Robustness Analysis and Robust Training

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2007.14120v2
• Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 16:38:47 GMT
• Title: Reachable Sets of Classifiers and Regression Models: (Non-)Robustness Analysis and Robust Training
• Authors: Anna-Kathrin Kopetzki, Stephan G\"unnemann
• Abstract summary: We analyze and enhance robustness properties of both classifiers and regression models. Specifically, we verify (non-)robustness, propose a robust training procedure, and show that our approach outperforms adversarial attacks. Second, we provide techniques to distinguish between reliable and non-reliable predictions for unlabeled inputs, to quantify the influence of each feature on a prediction, and compute a feature ranking.
• Score: 1.0878040851638
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Neural networks achieve outstanding accuracy in classification and regression tasks. However, understanding their behavior still remains an open challenge that requires questions to be addressed on the robustness, explainability and reliability of predictions. We answer these questions by computing reachable sets of neural networks, i.e. sets of outputs resulting from continuous sets of inputs. We provide two efficient approaches that lead to over- and under-approximations of the reachable set. This principle is highly versatile, as we show. First, we use it to analyze and enhance the robustness properties of both classifiers and regression models. This is in contrast to existing works, which are mainly focused on classification. Specifically, we verify (non-)robustness, propose a robust training procedure, and show that our approach outperforms adversarial attacks as well as state-of-the-art methods of verifying classifiers for non-norm bound perturbations. Second, we provide techniques to distinguish between reliable and non-reliable predictions for unlabeled inputs, to quantify the influence of each feature on a prediction, and compute a feature ranking.

Related papers

• Generalization bounds for regression and classification on adaptive covering input domains [1.4141453107129398]
  We focus on the generalization bound, which serves as an upper limit for the generalization error. In the case of classification tasks, we treat the target function as a one-hot, a piece-wise constant function, and employ 0/1 loss for error measurement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-29T05:40:08Z)
• Learning Robust Classifiers with Self-Guided Spurious Correlation Mitigation [26.544938760265136]
  Deep neural classifiers rely on spurious correlations between spurious attributes of inputs and targets to make predictions. We propose a self-guided spurious correlation mitigation framework. We show that training the classifier to distinguish different prediction behaviors reduces its reliance on spurious correlations without knowing them a priori.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-06T17:12:21Z)
• TWINS: A Fine-Tuning Framework for Improved Transferability of Adversarial Robustness and Generalization [89.54947228958494]
  This paper focuses on the fine-tuning of an adversarially pre-trained model in various classification tasks. We propose a novel statistics-based approach, Two-WIng NormliSation (TWINS) fine-tuning framework. TWINS is shown to be effective on a wide range of image classification datasets in terms of both generalization and robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-20T14:12:55Z)
• Addressing Mistake Severity in Neural Networks with Semantic Knowledge [0.0]
  Most robust training techniques aim to improve model accuracy on perturbed inputs. As an alternate form of robustness, we aim to reduce the severity of mistakes made by neural networks in challenging conditions. We leverage current adversarial training methods to generate targeted adversarial attacks during the training process. Results demonstrate that our approach performs better with respect to mistake severity compared to standard and adversarially trained models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-21T22:01:36Z)
• Tribrid: Stance Classification with Neural Inconsistency Detection [9.150728831518459]
  We study the problem of performing automatic stance classification on social media with neural architectures such as BERT. We present a new neural architecture where the input also includes automatically generated negated perspectives over a given claim. The model is jointly learned to make simultaneously multiple predictions, which can be used either to improve the classification of the original perspective or to filter out doubtful predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-14T08:13:03Z)
• Improving Uncertainty Calibration via Prior Augmented Data [56.88185136509654]
  Neural networks have proven successful at learning from complex data distributions by acting as universal function approximators. They are often overconfident in their predictions, which leads to inaccurate and miscalibrated probabilistic predictions. We propose a solution by seeking out regions of feature space where the model is unjustifiably overconfident, and conditionally raising the entropy of those predictions towards that of the prior distribution of the labels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-22T07:02:37Z)
• Robust Pre-Training by Adversarial Contrastive Learning [120.33706897927391]
  Recent work has shown that, when integrated with adversarial training, self-supervised pre-training can lead to state-of-the-art robustness. We improve robustness-aware self-supervised pre-training by learning representations consistent under both data augmentations and adversarial perturbations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-26T04:44:43Z)
• Revisiting One-vs-All Classifiers for Predictive Uncertainty and Out-of-Distribution Detection in Neural Networks [22.34227625637843]
  We investigate how the parametrization of the probabilities in discriminative classifiers affects the uncertainty estimates. We show that one-vs-all formulations can improve calibration on image classification tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-10T01:55:02Z)
• Provable tradeoffs in adversarially robust classification [96.48180210364893]
  We develop and leverage new tools, including recent breakthroughs from probability theory on robust isoperimetry. Our results reveal fundamental tradeoffs between standard and robust accuracy that grow when data is imbalanced.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-09T09:58:19Z)
• Hidden Cost of Randomized Smoothing [72.93630656906599]
  In this paper, we point out the side effects of current randomized smoothing. Specifically, we articulate and prove two major points: 1) the decision boundaries of smoothed classifiers will shrink, resulting in disparity in class-wise accuracy; 2) applying noise augmentation in the training process does not necessarily resolve the shrinking issue due to the inconsistent learning objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-02T23:37:42Z)
• Certified Robustness to Label-Flipping Attacks via Randomized Smoothing [105.91827623768724]
  Machine learning algorithms are susceptible to data poisoning attacks. We present a unifying view of randomized smoothing over arbitrary functions. We propose a new strategy for building classifiers that are pointwise-certifiably robust to general data poisoning attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-07T21:28:30Z)

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.