Cross-representation transferability of adversarial attacks: From spectrograms to audio waveforms
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper shows the susceptibility of spectrogram-based audio classifiers to adversarial attacks and the transferability of such attacks to audio waveforms. Some commonly used adversarial attacks to images have been applied to Mel-frequency and short-time Fourier transform spectrograms, and such perturbed spectrograms are able to fool a 2D convolutional neural network (CNN). Such attacks produce perturbed spectrograms that are visually imperceptible by humans. Furthermore, the audio waveforms reconstructed from the perturbed spectrograms are also able to fool a 1D CNN trained on the original audio. Experimental results on a dataset of western music have shown that the 2D CNN achieves up to 81.87% of mean accuracy on legitimate examples and such performance drops to 12.09% on adversarial examples. Likewise, the 1D CNN achieves up to 78.29% of mean accuracy on original audio samples and such performance drops to 27.91% on adversarial audio waveforms reconstructed from the perturbed spectrograms.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it