Adversarial Defense Method Based on Latent Representation Guidance for Remote Sensing Image Scene Classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep neural networks have made great achievements in remote sensing image analyses; however, previous studies have shown that deep neural networks exhibit incredible vulnerability to adversarial examples, which raises concerns about regional safety and production safety. In this paper, we propose an adversarial denoising method based on latent representation guidance for remote sensing image scene classification. In the training phase, we train a variational autoencoder to reconstruct the data using only the clean dataset. At test time, we first calculate the normalized mutual information between the reconstructed image using the variational autoencoder and the reference image as denoised by a discrete cosine transform. The reconstructed image is selectively utilized according to the result of the image quality assessment. Then, the latent representation of the current image is iteratively updated according to the reconstruction loss so as to gradually eliminate the influence of adversarial noise. Because the training of the denoiser only involves clean data, the proposed method is more robust against unknown adversarial noise. Experimental results on the scene classification dataset show the effectiveness of the proposed method. Furthermore, the method achieves better robust accuracy compared with state-of-the-art adversarial defense methods in image classification tasks.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".