PGD-Imp: Rethinking and Unleashing Potential of Classic PGD with Dual Strategies for Imperceptible Adversarial Attacks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Imperceptible adversarial attacks have recently attracted increasing research interests. Existing methods typically incorporate external modules or loss terms other than a simple lp-norm into the attack process to achieve imperceptibility, while we argue that such additional designs may not be necessary. In this paper, we rethink the essence of imperceptible attacks and propose two simple yet effective strategies to unleash the potential of PGD, the common and classical attack, for imperceptibility from an optimization perspective. Specifically, the Dynamic Step Size is introduced to find the optimal solution with minimal attack cost towards the decision boundary of the attacked model, and the Adaptive Early Stop strategy is adopted to reduce the redundant strength of adversarial perturbations to the minimum level. The proposed PGD-Imperceptible (PGD-Imp) attack achieves state-of-the-art results in imperceptible adversarial attacks for both untargeted and targeted scenarios. When performing untargeted attacks against ResNet-50, PGD-Imp attains 100% (+0.3%) ASR, 0.89 (-1.76) l2distance, and 52.93 (+9.2) PSNR with 57s (-371s) running time, significantly outperforming existing methods.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".