Online Evasion Attacks on Recurrent Models:The Power of Hallucinating the Future
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
Recurrent models are frequently being used in online tasks such as autonomous driving, and a comprehensive study of their vulnerability is called for. Existing research is limited in generality only addressing application-specific vulnerability or making implausible assumptions such as the knowledge of future input. In this paper, we present a general attack framework for online tasks incorporating the unique constraints of the online setting different from offline tasks. Our framework is versatile in that it covers time-varying adversarial objectives and various optimization constraints, allowing for a comprehensive study of robustness. Using the framework, we also present a novel white-box attack called Predictive Attack that `hallucinates' the future. The attack achieves 98 percent of the performance of the ideal but infeasible clairvoyant attack on average. We validate the effectiveness of the proposed framework and attacks through various experiments.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| 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