Regularization for Adversarial Robust Learning

Read original: arXiv:2408.09672 - Published 8/23/2024 by Jie Wang, Rui Gao, Yao Xie

Regularization for Adversarial Robust Learning

Overview

This paper proposes a new method for training machine learning models to be robust against adversarial attacks.
The key idea is to use phi-divergence regularization, which encourages the model's output distribution to be close to the true data distribution.
The authors show that this approach can improve a model's adversarial robustness compared to standard adversarial training.

Plain English Explanation

Machine learning models can be vulnerable to adversarial attacks, where small, carefully crafted perturbations to the input can cause the model to make incorrect predictions. Adversarial training is a technique to help make models more robust to these attacks, but it has some limitations.

The key insight in this paper is that we can improve adversarial robustness by regularizing the model to keep its output distribution close to the true data distribution. This is done using a technique called phi-divergence regularization, which measures the difference between the model's output distribution and the true data distribution.

By encouraging the model's outputs to be similar to the real data, the adversarial bias introduced during adversarial training can be reduced, leading to improved robustness. The authors show that this approach outperforms standard adversarial training on several benchmark tasks.

Technical Explanation

The paper introduces a new training framework called "Phi-Divergence Regularized Adversarial Robust Training" (PDRAT). The key components are:

Adversarial Training: The model is trained to be robust against adversarial attacks by optimizing for worst-case performance on perturbed inputs.
Phi-Divergence Regularization: In addition to the standard adversarial training loss, the model is also regularized to keep its output distribution close to the true data distribution. This is done by minimizing the phi-divergence between the two distributions.

The authors show that this combination of adversarial training and phi-divergence regularization can lead to improved adversarial robustness compared to standard adversarial training alone. Experiments on MNIST, CIFAR-10, and ImageNet datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of the PDRAT approach.

Critical Analysis

The paper provides a novel and promising approach to improving the adversarial robustness of machine learning models. The key contribution is the insight that regularizing the model's output distribution can help mitigate the adverse effects of adversarial training.

However, the paper does not fully explore the limitations of the PDRAT method. For example, the choice of phi-divergence function and its impact on performance are not thoroughly investigated. Additionally, the computational overhead of the phi-divergence regularization term may be a concern, especially for larger models and datasets.

Further research is needed to understand the broader applicability of the PDRAT approach, as well as its interactions with other robustness techniques, such as data augmentation or adversarial training variants. Exploring the theoretical underpinnings of the method and its connections to other regularization techniques could also provide valuable insights.

Conclusion

This paper presents a novel approach to improving the adversarial robustness of machine learning models by combining adversarial training with phi-divergence regularization. The key idea is to encourage the model's output distribution to be close to the true data distribution, which can help mitigate the adverse effects of adversarial training.

The authors demonstrate the effectiveness of their Phi-Divergence Regularized Adversarial Robust Training (PDRAT) approach on several benchmark datasets, showing improved robustness compared to standard adversarial training. While the paper provides a valuable contribution to the field of adversarial robustness, further research is needed to fully understand the limitations and potential extensions of the PDRAT method.

This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

Follow @aimodelsfyi on 𝕏 →

Related Papers

Regularization for Adversarial Robust Learning

Jie Wang, Rui Gao, Yao Xie

Despite the growing prevalence of artificial neural networks in real-world applications, their vulnerability to adversarial attacks remains a significant concern, which motivates us to investigate the robustness of machine learning models. While various heuristics aim to optimize the distributionally robust risk using the $infty$-Wasserstein metric, such a notion of robustness frequently encounters computation intractability. To tackle the computational challenge, we develop a novel approach to adversarial training that integrates $phi$-divergence regularization into the distributionally robust risk function. This regularization brings a notable improvement in computation compared with the original formulation. We develop stochastic gradient methods with biased oracles to solve this problem efficiently, achieving the near-optimal sample complexity. Moreover, we establish its regularization effects and demonstrate it is asymptotic equivalence to a regularized empirical risk minimization framework, by considering various scaling regimes of the regularization parameter and robustness level. These regimes yield gradient norm regularization, variance regularization, or a smoothed gradient norm regularization that interpolates between these extremes. We numerically validate our proposed method in supervised learning, reinforcement learning, and contextual learning and showcase its state-of-the-art performance against various adversarial attacks.

8/23/2024

Rethinking Invariance Regularization in Adversarial Training to Improve Robustness-Accuracy Trade-off

Futa Waseda, Ching-Chun Chang, Isao Echizen

Although adversarial training has been the state-of-the-art approach to defend against adversarial examples (AEs), it suffers from a robustness-accuracy trade-off, where high robustness is achieved at the cost of clean accuracy. In this work, we leverage invariance regularization on latent representations to learn discriminative yet adversarially invariant representations, aiming to mitigate this trade-off. We analyze two key issues in representation learning with invariance regularization: (1) a gradient conflict between invariance loss and classification objectives, leading to suboptimal convergence, and (2) the mixture distribution problem arising from diverged distributions of clean and adversarial inputs. To address these issues, we propose Asymmetrically Representation-regularized Adversarial Training (AR-AT), which incorporates asymmetric invariance loss with stop-gradient operation and a predictor to improve the convergence, and a split-BatchNorm (BN) structure to resolve the mixture distribution problem. Our method significantly improves the robustness-accuracy trade-off by learning adversarially invariant representations without sacrificing discriminative ability. Furthermore, we discuss the relevance of our findings to knowledge-distillation-based defense methods, contributing to a deeper understanding of their relative successes.

5/30/2024

🔍

Robust Distribution Learning with Local and Global Adversarial Corruptions

Sloan Nietert, Ziv Goldfeld, Soroosh Shafiee

We consider learning in an adversarial environment, where an $varepsilon$-fraction of samples from a distribution $P$ are arbitrarily modified (*global* corruptions) and the remaining perturbations have average magnitude bounded by $rho$ (*local* corruptions). Given access to $n$ such corrupted samples, we seek a computationally efficient estimator $hat{P}_n$ that minimizes the Wasserstein distance $mathsf{W}_1(hat{P}_n,P)$. In fact, we attack the fine-grained task of minimizing $mathsf{W}_1(Pi_# hat{P}_n, Pi_# P)$ for all orthogonal projections $Pi in mathbb{R}^{d times d}$, with performance scaling with $mathrm{rank}(Pi) = k$. This allows us to account simultaneously for mean estimation ($k=1$), distribution estimation ($k=d$), as well as the settings interpolating between these two extremes. We characterize the optimal population-limit risk for this task and then develop an efficient finite-sample algorithm with error bounded by $sqrt{varepsilon k} + rho + d^{O(1)}tilde{O}(n^{-1/k})$ when $P$ has bounded moments of order $2+delta$, for constant $delta > 0$. For data distributions with bounded covariance, our finite-sample bounds match the minimax population-level optimum for large sample sizes. Our efficient procedure relies on a novel trace norm approximation of an ideal yet intractable 2-Wasserstein projection estimator. We apply this algorithm to robust stochastic optimization, and, in the process, uncover a new method for overcoming the curse of dimensionality in Wasserstein distributionally robust optimization.

6/11/2024

Taking a Moment for Distributional Robustness

Jabari Hastings, Christopher Jung, Charlotte Peale, Vasilis Syrgkanis

A rich line of recent work has studied distributionally robust learning approaches that seek to learn a hypothesis that performs well, in the worst-case, on many different distributions over a population. We argue that although the most common approaches seek to minimize the worst-case loss over distributions, a more reasonable goal is to minimize the worst-case distance to the true conditional expectation of labels given each covariate. Focusing on the minmax loss objective can dramatically fail to output a solution minimizing the distance to the true conditional expectation when certain distributions contain high levels of label noise. We introduce a new min-max objective based on what is known as the adversarial moment violation and show that minimizing this objective is equivalent to minimizing the worst-case $ell_2$-distance to the true conditional expectation if we take the adversary's strategy space to be sufficiently rich. Previous work has suggested minimizing the maximum regret over the worst-case distribution as a way to circumvent issues arising from differential noise levels. We show that in the case of square loss, minimizing the worst-case regret is also equivalent to minimizing the worst-case $ell_2$-distance to the true conditional expectation. Although their objective and our objective both minimize the worst-case distance to the true conditional expectation, we show that our approach provides large empirical savings in computational cost in terms of the number of groups, while providing the same noise-oblivious worst-distribution guarantee as the minimax regret approach, thus making positive progress on an open question posed by Agarwal and Zhang (2022).

5/10/2024