Noise Sensitivity-Based Energy Efficient and Robust Adversary Detection in Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neural have achieved remarkable performance in computer vision, however, they are vulnerable to adversarial examples. Adversarial examples are inputs that have been carefully perturbed to fool classifier networks, while appearing unchanged to humans. Based on prior works on detecting adversaries, we propose a structured methodology of augmenting a deep neural network (DNN) with a detector subnetwork. We use adversarial noise sensitivity (ANS), a novel metric for measuring the adversarial gradient contribution of different intermediate layers of a network. Based on the ANS value, we append a detector to the most sensitive layer. In prior works, more complex detectors were added to a DNN, increasing the inference computational cost of the model. In contrast, our structured and strategic addition of a detector to a DNN reduces the complexity of the model while making the overall network adversarially resilient. Through comprehensive white-box and black-box experiments on MNIST, CIFAR-10, and CIFAR-100, we show that our method improves state-of-the-art detector robustness against adversarial examples. Furthermore, we validate the energy efficiency of our proposed adversarial detection methodology through an extensive energy analysis on various hardware scalable CMOS accelerator platforms. We also demonstrate the effects of quantization on our detector-appended networks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".