AdvDoor: adversarial backdoor attack of deep learning system
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
Deep Learning (DL) system has been widely used in many critical applications, such as autonomous vehicles and unmanned aerial vehicles. However, their security is threatened by backdoor attack, which is achieved by adding artificial patterns on specific training data. Existing attack methods normally poison the data using a patch, and they can be easily detected by existing detection methods. In this work, we propose the Adversarial Backdoor, which utilizes the Targeted Universal Adversarial Perturbation (TUAP) to hide the anomalies in DL models and confuse existing powerful detection methods. With extensive experiments, it is demonstrated that Adversarial Backdoor can be injected stably with an attack success rate around 98%. Moreover, Adversarial Backdoor can bypass state-of-the-art backdoor detection methods. More specifically, only around 37% of the poisoned models can be caught, and less than 29% of the poisoned data cannot bypass the detection. In contrast, for the patch backdoor, all the poisoned models and more than 80% of the poisoned data will be detected. This work intends to alarm the researchers and developers of this potential threat and to inspire the designing of effective detection 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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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