COMMIT: Certifying Robustness of Multi-Sensor Fusion Systems Against Semantic Attacks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi-sensor fusion systems (MSFs) play a vital role as the perception module in modern autonomous vehicles (AVs). Therefore, ensuring their robustness against common and realistic adversarial semantic transformations, such as rotation and shifting in the physical world, is crucial for the safety of AVs. While empirical evidence suggests that MSFs exhibit improved robustness compared to single-modal models, they are still vulnerable to adversarial semantic transformations. In addition, although many empirical defenses have been proposed, several works show that these defenses can be further attacked by new adaptive attacks. So far, there is no certified defense proposed for MSFs. In this work, we propose the first robustness certification framework COMMIT to certify the robustness of multi-sensor fusion systems against semantic attacks. In particular, we propose a practical anisotropic noise mechanism that leverages randomized smoothing on multi-modal data and performs a grid-based splitting method to characterize complex semantic transformations. We also propose efficient algorithms to compute the certification in terms of object detection accuracy and IoU for large-scale MSF models. Empirically, we evaluate the efficacy of COMMIT in different settings and provide a comprehensive benchmark of certified robustness for different MSF models using the CARLA simulation platform. We show that the certification for MSF models is at most 48.39% higher than that of single-modal models, which validates the advantages of MSF models. We believe our certification framework and benchmark will contribute an important step towards certifiably robust AVs in practice.
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 | 0.006 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".