MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Experimental Study of Trojan Vulnerabilities in UAV Autonomous Landing

2025· article· W7125954427 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTrojanVulnerability (computing)Resilience (materials science)CovertWork (physics)InterdictionVulnerability assessmentDeep learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the vulnerabilities of autonomous navigation and landing systems in Urban Air Mobility (UAM) vehicles. Specifically, it focuses on Trojan attacks that target deep learning models, such as Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs). Trojan attacks work by embedding covert triggers within a model’s training data. These triggers cause specific failures under certain conditions, while the model continues to perform normally in other situations.We assessed the vulnerability of Urban Autonomous Aerial Vehicles (UAAVs) using the DroNet framework. Our experiments showed a significant drop in accuracy, from 96.4% on clean data to 73.3% on data triggered by Trojan attacks. To conduct this study, we collected a custom dataset and trained models to simulate real-world conditions. We also developed an evaluation framework designed to identify Trojan-infected models. This work demonstrates the potential security risks posed by Trojan attacks and lays the groundwork for future research on enhancing the resilience of UAM systems.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.541
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it