SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 1901.00546

Multi-Label Adversarial Perturbations

Abstract

Adversarial examples are delicately perturbed inputs, which aim to mislead machine learning models towards incorrect outputs. While most of the existing work focuses on generating adversarial perturbations in multi-class classification problems, many real-world applications fall into the multi-label setting in which one instance could be associated with more than one label. For example, a spammer may generate adversarial spams with malicious advertising while maintaining the other labels such as topic labels unchanged. To analyze the vulnerability and robustness of multi-label learning models, we investigate the generation of multi-label adversarial perturbations. This is a challenging task due to the uncertain number of positive labels associated with one instance, as well as the fact that multiple labels are usually not mutually exclusive with each other. To bridge this gap, in this paper, we propose a general attacking framework targeting on multi-label classification problem and conduct a premier analysis on the perturbations for deep neural networks. Leveraging the ranking relationships among labels, we further design a ranking-based framework to attack multi-label ranking algorithms. We specify the connection between the two proposed frameworks and separately design two specific methods grounded on each of them to generate targeted multi-label perturbations. Experiments on real-world multi-label image classification and ranking problems demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed frameworks and provide insights of the vulnerability of multi-label deep learning models under diverse targeted attacking strategies. Several interesting findings including an unpolished defensive strategy, which could potentially enhance the interpretability and robustness of multi-label deep learning models, are further presented and discussed at the end.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Qingquan Song, Haifeng Jin, Xiao Huang, Xia Hu. 2019-01-02. Multi-Label Adversarial Perturbations. https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.00546

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG