NSA: Naturalistic Support Artifact to Boost Network Confidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visual AI systems are vulnerable to natural and synthetic physical corruption in the real-world. Such corruption often arises unexpectedly and alters the model's performance. In recent years, the primary focus has been on adversarial attacks. However, natural corruptions (e.g., snow, fog, dust) are an omnipresent threat to visual AI systems and should be considered equally important. Many existing works propose interesting solutions to train robust models against natural corruption. These works either leverage image augmentations, which come with the additional cost of model training, or place suspicious patches in the scene to design unadversarial examples. In this work, we propose the idea of naturalistic support artifacts (NSA) for robust prediction. The NSAs are shown to be beneficial in scenarios where model parameters are inaccessible and adding artifacts in the scene is feasible. The NSAs are natural looking objects generated through artifact training using DC-GAN to have high visual fidelity in the scene. We test against natural corruptions on the Imagenette dataset and observe the improvement in prediction confidence score by four times. We also demonstrate NSA's capability to increase adversarial accuracy by 8% on average. Lastly, we qualitatively analyze NSAs using saliency maps to understand how they help improve prediction confidence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".