Tougher Text, Smarter Models: Raising the Bar for Adversarial Defence Benchmarks

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.02654v2
• Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2025 14:53:41 GMT
• Title: Tougher Text, Smarter Models: Raising the Bar for Adversarial Defence Benchmarks
• Authors: Yang Wang, Chenghua Lin,
• Abstract summary: Our benchmark incorporates a wide range of datasets, evaluates state-of-the-art defence mechanisms, and extends the assessment to include critical tasks. By establishing a new standard for benchmarking in this domain, we aim to accelerate progress towards more robust and reliable natural language processing systems.
• Score: 18.565448090184
• License:
• Abstract: Recent advancements in natural language processing have highlighted the vulnerability of deep learning models to adversarial attacks. While various defence mechanisms have been proposed, there is a lack of comprehensive benchmarks that evaluate these defences across diverse datasets, models, and tasks. In this work, we address this gap by presenting an extensive benchmark for textual adversarial defence that significantly expands upon previous work. Our benchmark incorporates a wide range of datasets, evaluates state-of-the-art defence mechanisms, and extends the assessment to include critical tasks such as single-sentence classification, similarity and paraphrase identification, natural language inference, and commonsense reasoning. This work not only serves as a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners in the field of adversarial robustness but also identifies key areas for future research in textual adversarial defence. By establishing a new standard for benchmarking in this domain, we aim to accelerate progress towards more robust and reliable natural language processing systems.

Related papers

• Adversarial Alignment for LLMs Requires Simpler, Reproducible, and More Measurable Objectives [52.863024096759816]
  Misaligned research objectives have hindered progress in adversarial robustness research over the past decade. We argue that realigned objectives are necessary for meaningful progress in adversarial alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T15:28:40Z)
• Jailbreaking and Mitigation of Vulnerabilities in Large Language Models [4.564507064383306]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed artificial intelligence by advancing natural language understanding and generation. Despite these advancements, LLMs have shown considerable vulnerabilities, particularly to prompt injection and jailbreaking attacks. This review analyzes the state of research on these vulnerabilities and presents available defense strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-20T00:00:56Z)
• MIBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Model Inversion Attack and Defense [43.71365087852274]
  Model Inversion (MI) attacks aim at leveraging the output information of target models to reconstruct privacy-sensitive training data. The lack of a comprehensive, aligned, and reliable benchmark has emerged as a formidable challenge. We introduce the first practical benchmark for model inversion attacks and defenses to address this critical gap, which is named textitMIBench
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-07T16:13:49Z)
• Context-aware Adversarial Attack on Named Entity Recognition [15.049160192547909]
  We study context-aware adversarial attack methods to examine the model's robustness. Specifically, we propose perturbing the most informative words for recognizing entities to create adversarial examples. Experiments and analyses show that our methods are more effective in deceiving the model into making wrong predictions than strong baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-16T14:04:23Z)
• Measuring Equality in Machine Learning Security Defenses: A Case Study in Speech Recognition [56.69875958980474]
  This work considers approaches to defending learned systems and how security defenses result in performance inequities across different sub-populations. We find that many methods that have been proposed can cause direct harm, like false rejection and unequal benefits from robustness training. We present a comparison of equality between two rejection-based defenses: randomized smoothing and neural rejection, finding randomized smoothing more equitable due to the sampling mechanism for minority groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-17T16:19:26Z)
• A Unified Evaluation of Textual Backdoor Learning: Frameworks and Benchmarks [72.7373468905418]
  We develop an open-source toolkit OpenBackdoor to foster the implementations and evaluations of textual backdoor learning. We also propose CUBE, a simple yet strong clustering-based defense baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-17T02:29:23Z)
• Poisoning Attacks and Defenses on Artificial Intelligence: A Survey [3.706481388415728]
  Data poisoning attacks represent a type of attack that consists of tampering the data samples fed to the model during the training phase, leading to a degradation in the models accuracy during the inference phase. This work compiles the most relevant insights and findings found in the latest existing literatures addressing this type of attacks. A thorough assessment is performed on the reviewed works, comparing the effects of data poisoning on a wide range of ML models in real-world conditions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-21T14:43:38Z)
• Adversarial GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark for Robustness Evaluation of Language Models [86.02610674750345]
  Adversarial GLUE (AdvGLUE) is a new multi-task benchmark to explore and evaluate the vulnerabilities of modern large-scale language models under various types of adversarial attacks. We apply 14 adversarial attack methods to GLUE tasks to construct AdvGLUE, which is further validated by humans for reliable annotations. All the language models and robust training methods we tested perform poorly on AdvGLUE, with scores lagging far behind the benign accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-04T12:59:55Z)
• Searching for an Effective Defender: Benchmarking Defense against Adversarial Word Substitution [83.84968082791444]
  Deep neural networks are vulnerable to intentionally crafted adversarial examples. Various methods have been proposed to defend against adversarial word-substitution attacks for neural NLP models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-29T08:11:36Z)
• Detecting Cross-Modal Inconsistency to Defend Against Neural Fake News [57.9843300852526]
  We introduce the more realistic and challenging task of defending against machine-generated news that also includes images and captions. To identify the possible weaknesses that adversaries can exploit, we create a NeuralNews dataset composed of 4 different types of generated articles. In addition to the valuable insights gleaned from our user study experiments, we provide a relatively effective approach based on detecting visual-semantic inconsistencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-16T14:13:15Z)

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.