MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197880668 · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3110239

Use Procedural Noise to Achieve Backdoor Attack

2021· article· en· W3197880668 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Xuan Chen, Yuena Ma, Shiwei Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Shaanxi ProvinceCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsBackdoorRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceComputer securityNoise (video)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, more researchers pay their attention to the security of artificial intelligence. The backdoor attack is one of the threats and has a powerful, stealthy attack ability. There exist a growing trend towards the triggers is that the triggers become dynamic and global. In this paper, we propose a novel global backdoor trigger generated by procedural noise. Our backdoor triggers are much stealthy and straightforward to implement compared with most triggers. There are three types of procedural noise, and we evaluate the attack ability for the triggers with them on the different classification datasets, including CIFAR-10, GTSRB, CelebA, and ImageNet12.The experiment results show that our attack approach can bypass most defense approaches, even for the inspections of humans. We only need poison 5%-10% training data, and the attack success rate(ASR) can reach over 99%. To test the robustness of the backdoor model against the corruption methods that in practice, we introduce 17 corruption methods and compute the accuracy, attack success rate(ASR) of the backdoor model. The facts show that the backdoor models generated by our approaches have strong robustness for the most corruption methods and can be applied in reality. Our code is available at https://github.com/928082786/pnoiseattack.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningFrench-language works237,207