Cited by 32Adversarial Robustness in Machine LearningSecurity and Verification in ComputingPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data

MARNet: Backdoor Attacks Against Cooperative Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning

Chen, Yanjiao, Zheng, Zhicong, Gong, Xueluan·2023·IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing

Abstract

Recent works have revealed that backdoor attacks against Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) could lead to abnormal action selections of the agent, which may result in failure or even catastrophe in crucial decision processes. However, existing attacks only consider single-agent reinforcement learning (RL) systems, in which the only agent can observe the global state and have full control of the decision process. In this article, we explore a new backdoor attack paradigm in cooperative multi-agent reinforcement learning (CMARL) scenarios, where a group of agents coordinate with each other to achieve a common goal, while each agent can only observe the local state. In the proposed MARNet attack framework, we carefully design a pipeline of trigger design, action poisoning, and reward hacking modules to accommodate the cooperative multi-agent settings. In particular, as only a subset of agents can observe the triggers in their local observations, we maneuver their actions to the worst actions suggested by an expert policy model. Since the global reward in CMARL is aggregated by individual rewards from all agents, we propose to modify the reward in a way that boosts the bad actions of poisoned agents (agents who observe the triggers) but mitigates the influence on non-poisoned agents. We conduct extensive experiments on three classical CMARL algorithms VDN, COMA, and QMIX, in two popular CMARL games Predator Prey and SMAC. The results show that the baselines extended from single-agent DRL backdoor attacks seldom work in CMARL problems while MARNet performs well by reducing the utility under attack by nearly 100%. We apply fine-tuning as a potential defense against MARNet and demonstrate that fine-tuning cannot entirely eliminate the effect of the attack.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tdsc.2022.3207429

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 38 · Cited by 32

Authors
Chen, Y., Zheng, Z., & Gong, X.
Affiliations
  • Zhejiang University (CN)
  • Wuhan University (CN)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing
Published
2023-09-01
Volume
20
Issue
5
Pages
4188-4198
ISSN
  • 1545-5971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-0018
  • 2160-9209
OpenAlex
W4296437512
Cited by
32
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 9
FWCI
2.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Natural Science Foundation of China (61972296)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Security and Verification in Computing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Keywords
backdoor attacks, cooperative multi-agent reinforcement learning, reward hacking, trigger design, local observations, coma, QMIX, Smac/DIABLO

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review