Toward Intelligent Detection Modelling for Adversarial Samples in Convolutional Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) are hierarchical nonlinear architectures that have been widely used in artificial intelligence applications. However, these models are vulnerable to adversarial perturbations which add changes slightly and are crafted explicitly to fool the model. Such attacks will cause the neural network to completely change its classification of data. Although various defense strategies have been proposed, existing defense methods have two limitations. First, the discovery success rate is not very high. Second, existing methods depend on the output of a particular layer in a specific learning structure. In this paper, we propose a powerful method for adversarial samples using Large Margin Cosine Estimate(LMCE). By iteratively calculating the large-margin cosine uncertainty estimates between the model predictions, the results can be regarded as a novel measurement of model uncertainty estimation and is available to detect adversarial samples by training using a simple machine learning algorithm. Comparing it with the way in which adversar- ial samples are generated, it is confirmed that this measurement can better distinguish hostile disturbances. We modeled deep neural network attacks and established defense mechanisms against various types of adversarial attacks. Classifier gets better performance than the baseline model. The approach is validated on a series of standard datasets including MNIST and CIFAR -10, outperforming previous ensemble method with strong statistical significance. Experiments indicate that our approach generalizes better across different architectures and attacks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".