Adversarial Robustness Via Fisher-Rao Regularization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adversarial robustness has become a topic of growing interest in machine learning since it was observed that neural networks tend to be brittle. We propose an information-geometric formulation of adversarial defense and introduce Fire, a new Fisher-Rao regularization for the categorical cross-entropy loss, which is based on the geodesic distance between the softmax outputs corresponding to natural and perturbed input features. Based on the information-geometric properties of the class of softmax distributions, we derive an explicit characterization of the Fisher-Rao Distance (FRD) for the binary and multiclass cases, and draw some interesting properties as well as connections with standard regularization metrics. Furthermore, we verify on a simple linear and Gaussian model, that all Pareto-optimal points in the accuracy-robustness region can be reached by Fire while other state-of-the-art methods fail. Empirically, we evaluate the performance of various classifiers trained with the proposed loss on standard datasets, showing up to a simultaneous 1% of improvement in terms of clean and robust performances while reducing the training time by 20% over the best-performing methods.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".