Learning adversarially robust kernel ensembles with kernel average pooling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Model ensembles have long been used in machine learning to reduce the variance in individual model predictions, making them more robust to input perturbations. Pseudo-ensemble methods like dropout have also been commonly used in deep learning models to improve generalization. However, the application of these techniques to improve neural networks’ robustness against input perturbations remains underexplored. We introduce Kernel Average Pooling (KAP) , a neural network building block that applies the mean filter along the kernel dimension of the layer activation tensor. We show that ensembles of kernels with similar functionality naturally emerge in convolutional neural networks equipped with KAP and trained with backpropagation. Moreover, we show that when trained on inputs perturbed with additive Gaussian noise, KAP models are remarkably robust against various forms of adversarial attacks. Empirical evaluations on CIFAR10, CIFAR100, TinyImagenet, and Imagenet datasets show substantial improvements in robustness against strong adversarial attacks such as AutoAttack without training on any adversarial examples. • We introduce kernel average pooling (KAP) for learning ensembles in neural networks. • KAP leads to learning topographically organized kernel ensembles. • KAP networks develop substantial robustness against input noise.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".