Alignment and Adversarial Robustness: Are More Human-Like Models More Secure?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.12377v2
• Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:15:27 GMT
• Title: Alignment and Adversarial Robustness: Are More Human-Like Models More Secure?
• Authors: Blaine Hoak, Kunyang Li, Patrick McDaniel,
• Abstract summary: We conduct a large-scale empirical analysis to investigate the relationship between representational alignment and adversarial robustness.<n>Our findings reveal that while average alignment and robustness exhibit a weak overall correlation, specific alignment benchmarks serve as strong predictors of adversarial robustness.<n>These results suggest that different forms of alignment play distinct roles in model robustness, motivating further investigation into how alignment-driven approaches can be leveraged to build more secure and perceptually-grounded vision models.
• Score: 2.5228303963685366
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: A small but growing body of work has shown that machine learning models which better align with human vision have also exhibited higher robustness to adversarial examples, raising the question: can human-like perception make models more secure? If true generally, such mechanisms would offer new avenues toward robustness. In this work, we conduct a large-scale empirical analysis to systematically investigate the relationship between representational alignment and adversarial robustness. We evaluate 114 models spanning diverse architectures and training paradigms, measuring their neural and behavioral alignment and engineering task performance across 105 benchmarks as well as their adversarial robustness via AutoAttack. Our findings reveal that while average alignment and robustness exhibit a weak overall correlation, specific alignment benchmarks serve as strong predictors of adversarial robustness, particularly those that measure selectivity toward texture or shape. These results suggest that different forms of alignment play distinct roles in model robustness, motivating further investigation into how alignment-driven approaches can be leveraged to build more secure and perceptually-grounded vision models.

Related papers

• Benchmarking Adversarial Robustness to Bias Elicitation in Large Language Models: Scalable Automated Assessment with LLM-as-a-Judge [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized artificial intelligence, driving advancements in machine translation, summarization, and conversational agents.<n>Recent studies indicate that LLMs remain vulnerable to adversarial attacks designed to elicit biased responses.<n>This work proposes a scalable benchmarking framework to evaluate LLM robustness against adversarial bias elicitation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T16:00:59Z)
• Benchmarking the Spatial Robustness of DNNs via Natural and Adversarial Localized Corruptions [49.546479320670464]
  This paper introduces specialized metrics for benchmarking the spatial robustness of segmentation models. We propose region-aware multi-attack adversarial analysis, a method that enables a deeper understanding of model robustness. The results reveal that models respond to these two types of threats differently.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-02T11:37:39Z)
• A Robust Adversarial Ensemble with Causal (Feature Interaction) Interpretations for Image Classification [9.945272787814941]
  We present a deep ensemble model that combines discriminative features with generative models to achieve both high accuracy and adversarial robustness.<n>Our approach integrates a bottom-level pre-trained discriminative network for feature extraction with a top-level generative classification network that models adversarial input distributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-28T05:06:20Z)
• On Adversarial Robustness and Out-of-Distribution Robustness of Large Language Models [0.16874375111244325]
  We investigate the correlation between adversarial robustness and OOD robustness in large language models (LLMs)<n>Our findings highlight nuanced interactions between adversarial robustness and OOD robustness, with results indicating limited transferability.<n>Further research is needed to evaluate these interactions across larger models and varied architectures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-13T20:04:25Z)
• Evaluating the Adversarial Robustness of Semantic Segmentation: Trying Harder Pays Off [0.6554326244334868]
  We argue that a good approximation of the sensitivity to adversarial perturbations requires significantly more effort than what is currently considered satisfactory. We propose new attacks and combine them with the strongest attacks available in the literature. Our results also demonstrate that a diverse set of strong attacks is necessary, because different models are often vulnerable to different attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-12T10:32:53Z)
• Super(ficial)-alignment: Strong Models May Deceive Weak Models in Weak-to-Strong Generalization [68.62228569439478]
  We investigate whether there exists an issue of weak-to-strong deception.<n>We find that the deception intensifies as the capability gap between weak and strong models increases.<n>Our work highlights the urgent need to pay more attention to the true reliability of superalignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T11:36:39Z)
• Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Visual State Space Models [63.14954591606638]
  Vision State Space Models (VSSMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance in visual perception tasks. However, their robustness under natural and adversarial perturbations remains a critical concern. We present a comprehensive evaluation of VSSMs' robustness under various perturbation scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T17:59:44Z)
• Exploring the Adversarial Frontier: Quantifying Robustness via Adversarial Hypervolume [17.198794644483026]
  We propose a new metric termed adversarial hypervolume, assessing the robustness of deep learning models comprehensively over a range of perturbation intensities. We adopt a novel training algorithm that enhances adversarial robustness uniformly across various perturbation intensities. This research contributes a new measure of robustness and establishes a standard for assessing benchmarking and the resilience of current and future defensive models against adversarial threats.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-08T07:03:18Z)
• JAB: Joint Adversarial Prompting and Belief Augmentation [81.39548637776365]
  We introduce a joint framework in which we probe and improve the robustness of a black-box target model via adversarial prompting and belief augmentation. This framework utilizes an automated red teaming approach to probe the target model, along with a belief augmenter to generate instructions for the target model to improve its robustness to those adversarial probes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T00:35:54Z)
• Interpretable Computer Vision Models through Adversarial Training: Unveiling the Robustness-Interpretability Connection [0.0]
  Interpretability is as essential as robustness when we deploy the models to the real world. Standard models, compared to robust are more susceptible to adversarial attacks, and their learned representations are less meaningful to humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-04T13:51:55Z)
• On the Robustness of Aspect-based Sentiment Analysis: Rethinking Model, Data, and Training [109.9218185711916]
  Aspect-based sentiment analysis (ABSA) aims at automatically inferring the specific sentiment polarities toward certain aspects of products or services behind social media texts or reviews. We propose to enhance the ABSA robustness by systematically rethinking the bottlenecks from all possible angles, including model, data, and training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-19T11:07:43Z)
• Fairness Increases Adversarial Vulnerability [50.90773979394264]
  This paper shows the existence of a dichotomy between fairness and robustness, and analyzes when achieving fairness decreases the model robustness to adversarial samples. Experiments on non-linear models and different architectures validate the theoretical findings in multiple vision domains. The paper proposes a simple, yet effective, solution to construct models achieving good tradeoffs between fairness and robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-21T19:55:35Z)
• Are Neural Topic Models Broken? [81.15470302729638]
  We study the relationship between automated and human evaluation of topic models. We find that neural topic models fare worse in both respects compared to an established classical method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-28T14:38:50Z)
• Clustering Effect of (Linearized) Adversarial Robust Models [60.25668525218051]
  We propose a novel understanding of adversarial robustness and apply it on more tasks including domain adaption and robustness boosting. Experimental evaluations demonstrate the rationality and superiority of our proposed clustering strategy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-25T05:51:03Z)
• SafeAMC: Adversarial training for robust modulation recognition models [53.391095789289736]
  In communication systems, there are many tasks, like modulation recognition, which rely on Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) models. These models have been shown to be susceptible to adversarial perturbations, namely imperceptible additive noise crafted to induce misclassification. We propose to use adversarial training, which consists of fine-tuning the model with adversarial perturbations, to increase the robustness of automatic modulation recognition models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-28T11:29:04Z)

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.