Robust Structured Declarative Classifiers for Point Clouds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep neural networks for 3D point cloud classification, such as PointNet, have been demonstrated to be vulnerable to adversarial attacks. Current adversarial defenders often learn to denoise the (attacked) point clouds by reconstruction, and then feed them to the classifiers as input. In contrast to the literature, we propose a novel bilevel optimization framework for robust point cloud classification, where the internal optimization can effectively defend the adversarial attacks as denoising and the external optimization can learn the classifiers accordingly. As a demonstration, we further propose an effective and efficient instantiation of our approach, namely, Lattice Point Classifier (LPC), based on structured sparse coding in the permutohedral lattice and 2D convolutional neural networks (CNNs) that integrates both internal and external optimization problems into end-to-end trainable network architectures. We demonstrate state-of-the-art robust point cloud classification performance on ModelNet40 and ScanNet under seven different attackers. Our demo code is available at: https://github.com/Zhang-VISLab .
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".