PointCAT: Contrastive Adversarial Training for Robust Point Cloud Recognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Notwithstanding the prominent performance shown in various applications, point cloud recognition models have often suffered from natural corruptions and adversarial perturbations. In this paper, we delve into boosting the general robustness of point cloud recognition, proposing Point-Cloud Contrastive Adversarial Training (PointCAT). The main intuition of PointCAT is encouraging the target recognition model to narrow the decision gap between clean point clouds and corrupted point clouds by devising feature-level constraints rather than logit-level constraints. Specifically, we leverage a supervised contrastive loss to facilitate the alignment and the uniformity of hypersphere representations, and design a pair of centralizing losses with dynamic prototype guidance to prevent features from deviating outside their belonging category clusters. To generate more challenging corrupted point clouds, we adversarially train a noise generator concurrently with the recognition model from the scratch. This differs from previous adversarial training methods that utilized gradient-based attacks as the inner loop. Comprehensive experiments show that the proposed PointCAT outperforms the baseline methods, significantly enhancing the robustness of diverse point cloud recognition models under various corruptions, including isotropic point noises, the LiDAR simulated noises, random point dropping, and adversarial perturbations. Our code is available at: https://github.com/shikiw/PointCAT.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".