Towards Certification of Uncertainty Calibration under Adversarial Attacks

Overview

• Neural classifiers are sensitive to adversarial perturbations that can alter their accuracy.
• Certification methods have been developed to provide guarantees on the insensitivity of their predictions to such perturbations.
• In safety-critical applications, the frequentist interpretation of a classifier's confidence (model calibration) is important.
• Attacks can significantly harm calibration, so the researchers propose certified calibration as worst-case bounds on calibration under adversarial perturbations.
• The researchers produce analytic bounds for the Brier score and approximate bounds via mixed-integer programming for the expected calibration error.
• They also propose novel calibration attacks and demonstrate how they can improve model calibration through adversarial calibration training.

Plain English Explanation

Neural networks, a type of machine learning model, are known to be vulnerable to small changes in their input data, called adversarial perturbations. These changes can cause the model to make incorrect predictions, even when the original input appears unchanged to a human. To address this, researchers have developed certification methods that can provide guarantees about the model's resilience to these perturbations.

In safety-critical applications, like healthcare or self-driving cars, it's important that the model's confidence in its predictions is well-calibrated. This means that if the model is 90% confident in a prediction, it should be correct 90% of the time. The researchers show that adversarial attacks can disrupt this calibration, causing the model to be overconfident or underconfident in its predictions.

To address this, the researchers propose "certified calibration" - bounds on how much the model's calibration can be affected by adversarial perturbations. They derive mathematical formulas to calculate these bounds, both for a metric called the Brier score and for another metric called the expected calibration error.

The researchers also develop new types of adversarial attacks that specifically target the model's calibration. They show that by training the model to be robust to these calibration attacks, the model's overall calibration can be improved, a process they call "adversarial calibration training."

Technical Explanation

The paper explores the problem of model calibration - the alignment between a classifier's predicted probabilities and the true probabilities of the corresponding outcomes. The researchers show that neural classifiers, which are known to be vulnerable to adversarial perturbations, can also have their calibration significantly harmed by such attacks.

To address this, the researchers propose the concept of "certified calibration" - providing provable guarantees on the worst-case deviation of a classifier's calibration under adversarial perturbations. Specifically, they derive analytic bounds on the Brier score, a common metric for measuring calibration, and approximate bounds on the expected calibration error via the solution of a mixed-integer program.

Additionally, the researchers introduce novel "calibration attacks" that specifically target a model's calibration, rather than its overall accuracy. They show that by training models to be robust to these calibration-focused attacks, a process they call "adversarial calibration training," the overall calibration of the model can be improved.

The experiments in the paper demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed certification methods and calibration attacks across a variety of benchmark datasets and model architectures. The researchers also discuss the potential implications of their findings for safety-critical applications where model calibration is of utmost importance.

Critical Analysis

The paper presents a comprehensive study of adversarial attacks on model calibration, an important but often overlooked aspect of neural network performance. The proposed certification methods and calibration attacks are technically sound and the empirical results are compelling.

However, one potential limitation is the computational complexity of the mixed-integer programming approach used to derive bounds on the expected calibration error. This may limit the scalability of the proposed methods to larger models or datasets. Additionally, the paper does not explore the trade-offs between certified calibration and other desirable model properties, such as predictive accuracy or robustness to other types of adversarial attacks.

Further research could investigate more efficient approximation techniques for certified calibration, as well as the interplay between calibration, accuracy, and other model characteristics in the presence of adversarial perturbations. Exploring the practical implications of certified calibration in real-world, safety-critical applications would also be a valuable avenue for future work.

Conclusion

This paper makes important contributions to the field of model calibration, particularly in the context of adversarial robustness. By proposing certified calibration and novel calibration attacks, the researchers have expanded our understanding of the vulnerabilities of neural classifiers and provided tools to mitigate these issues.

The findings have significant implications for the deployment of machine learning models in safety-critical applications, where accurate and well-calibrated predictions are of paramount importance. The techniques presented in this paper can help ensure that models maintain their reliability and trustworthiness, even in the face of adversarial threats.

As machine learning systems become increasingly ubiquitous, the importance of addressing these challenges will only grow. This paper serves as a valuable step forward in the ongoing effort to develop more robust and trustworthy AI systems.