Adaptive and oblivious statistical adversaries are equivalent

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.13548v1
• Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 13:42:56 GMT
• Title: Adaptive and oblivious statistical adversaries are equivalent
• Abstract summary: We show that for all types of corruptions, sample-adaptive and sample-oblivious adversaries are emph up to equivalent factors in the sample size. We show that there is an algorithm $A'$ that solves the same task when the corresponding sample-adaptive adversary corrupts its input.
• Score: 18.385321286452747
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: We resolve a fundamental question about the ability to perform a statistical task, such as learning, when an adversary corrupts the sample. Such adversaries are specified by the types of corruption they can make and their level of knowledge about the sample. The latter distinguishes between sample-adaptive adversaries which know the contents of the sample when choosing the corruption, and sample-oblivious adversaries, which do not. We prove that for all types of corruptions, sample-adaptive and sample-oblivious adversaries are \emph{equivalent} up to polynomial factors in the sample size. This resolves the main open question introduced by \cite{BLMT22} and further explored in \cite{CHLLN23}. Specifically, consider any algorithm $A$ that solves a statistical task even when a sample-oblivious adversary corrupts its input. We show that there is an algorithm $A'$ that solves the same task when the corresponding sample-adaptive adversary corrupts its input. The construction of $A'$ is simple and maintains the computational efficiency of $A$: It requests a polynomially larger sample than $A$ uses and then runs $A$ on a uniformly random subsample. One of our main technical tools is a new structural result relating two distributions defined on sunflowers which may be of independent interest.

Related papers

• The Sample Complexity of Multiclass and Sparse Contextual Bandits [106.74652380822778]
  We aim to identify an approximately optimal policy from a given class based on bandit feedback.<n>Motivated by bandit multiclass classification with zero-one rewards, we focus on the emph$s$-sparse setting.<n>We show that, with $s$-sparse rewards, the induced model class admits a sharp DEC bound that scales with $s$ and directly yields the optimal rate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-28T09:12:20Z)
• High-Dimensional Robust Mean Estimation with Untrusted Batches [38.14592862692954]
  We study high-dimensional mean estimation in a collaborative setting where data is contributed by $N$ users in batches of size $n$.<n>We formalize this challenge through a double corruption landscape: an $varepsilon$-fraction of users are entirely adversarial, while the remaining good'' users provide data from distributions that are related to $P$, but deviate by a proximity parameter $$.<n>Our algorithms achieve the minimax-optimal error rate $O(sqrtvarepsilon/n + sqrtd/nN + s
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-24T08:59:37Z)
• The Sample Complexity of Membership Inference and Privacy Auditing [7.865646654746587]
  A membership-inference attack gets the output of a learning algorithm, and a target individual, and tries to determine whether this individual is a member of the training data or an independent sample from the same distribution.<n>A successful membership-inference attack typically requires the attacker to have some knowledge about the distribution that the training data was sampled from.<n>We show that for membership inference in this setting, $Omega(n + n2 rho2)$ samples can be necessary to carry out any attack that competes with a fully informed attacker.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-26T22:19:28Z)
• Bias Mimicking: A Simple Sampling Approach for Bias Mitigation [57.17709477668213]
  We introduce a new class-conditioned sampling method: Bias Mimicking. Bias Mimicking improves underrepresented groups' accuracy of sampling methods by 3% over four benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-30T17:33:00Z)
• Sample Complexity Bounds for Robustly Learning Decision Lists against Evasion Attacks [25.832511407411637]
  A fundamental problem in adversarial machine learning is to quantify how much training data is needed in the presence of evasion attacks. We work with probability distributions on the input data that satisfy a Lipschitz condition: nearby points have similar probability. For every fixed $k$ the class of $k$-decision lists has sample complexity against a $log(n)$-bounded adversary.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-12T14:40:18Z)
• On the power of adaptivity in statistical adversaries [18.973408992715203]
  We study a fundamental question concerning adversarial noise models in statistical problems. Can the behavior of an algorithm $mathcalA'$ in the presence of oblivious adversaries always be well-approximated by that of an algorithm $mathcalA'$ in the presence of adaptive adversaries?
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-19T18:26:25Z)
• Linear Contextual Bandits with Adversarial Corruptions [91.38793800392108]
  We study the linear contextual bandit problem in the presence of adversarial corruption. We present a variance-aware algorithm that is adaptive to the level of adversarial contamination $C$.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-25T02:53:24Z)
• The Sample Complexity of Robust Covariance Testing [56.98280399449707]
  We are given i.i.d. samples from a distribution of the form $Z = (1-epsilon) X + epsilon B$, where $X$ is a zero-mean and unknown covariance Gaussian $mathcalN(0, Sigma)$. In the absence of contamination, prior work gave a simple tester for this hypothesis testing task that uses $O(d)$ samples. We prove a sample complexity lower bound of $Omega(d2)$ for $epsilon$ an arbitrarily small constant and $gamma
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-31T18:24:41Z)
• Binary classification with ambiguous training data [69.50862982117127]
  In supervised learning, we often face with ambiguous (A) samples that are difficult to label even by domain experts. This problem is substantially different from semi-supervised learning since unlabeled samples are not necessarily difficult samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-05T00:53:58Z)
• Optimal Testing of Discrete Distributions with High Probability [49.19942805582874]
  We study the problem of testing discrete distributions with a focus on the high probability regime. We provide the first algorithms for closeness and independence testing that are sample-optimal, within constant factors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-14T16:09:17Z)
• A Provably Efficient Sample Collection Strategy for Reinforcement Learning [123.69175280309226]
  One of the challenges in online reinforcement learning (RL) is that the agent needs to trade off the exploration of the environment and the exploitation of the samples to optimize its behavior. We propose to tackle the exploration-exploitation problem following a decoupled approach composed of: 1) An "objective-specific" algorithm that prescribes how many samples to collect at which states, as if it has access to a generative model (i.e., sparse simulator of the environment); 2) An "objective-agnostic" sample collection responsible for generating the prescribed samples as fast as possible.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-13T15:17:35Z)
• The Simulator: Understanding Adaptive Sampling in the Moderate-Confidence Regime [52.38455827779212]
  We propose a novel technique for analyzing adaptive sampling called the em Simulator. We prove the first instance-based lower bounds the top-k problem which incorporate the appropriate log-factors. Our new analysis inspires a simple and near-optimal for the best-arm and top-k identification, the first em practical of its kind for the latter problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2017-02-16T23:42:02Z)

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.