Soft Adversarial Training Can Retain Natural Accuracy
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
Adversarial training for neural networks has been in the limelight in recent years. The advancement in neural network architectures over the last decade has led to significant improvement in their performance. It sparked an interest in their deployment for real-time applications. This process initiated the need to understand the vulnerability of these models to adversarial attacks. It is instrumental in designing models that are robust against adversaries. Recent works have proposed novel techniques to counter the adversaries, most often sacrificing natural accuracy. Most suggest training with an adversarial version of the inputs, constantly moving away from the original distribution. The focus of our work is to use abstract certification to extract a subset of inputs for (hence we call it 'soft') adversarial training. We propose a training framework that can retain natural accuracy without sacrificing robustness in a constrained setting. Our framework specifically targets moderately critical applications which require a reasonable balance between robustness and accuracy. The results testify to the idea of soft adversarial training for the defense against adversarial attacks. At last, we propose the scope of future work for further improvement of this framework.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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