PreprintCited by 2,325Adversarial Robustness in Machine LearningSecurity and Verification in ComputingDigital Media Forensic Detection

Adversarial machine learning at scale

Open access
Kurakin, Alexey, Goodfellow, Ian, Bengio, Samy·2016·arXiv

Abstract

Adversarial examples are malicious inputs designed to fool machine learning models. They often transfer from one model to another, allowing attackers to mount black box attacks without knowledge of the target model's parameters. Adversarial training is the process of explicitly training a model on adversarial examples, in order to make it more robust to attack or to reduce its test error on clean inputs. So far, adversarial training has primarily been applied to small problems. In this research, we apply adversarial training to ImageNet. Our contributions include: (1) recommendations for how to succesfully scale adversarial training to large models and datasets, (2) the observation that adversarial training confers robustness to single-step attack methods, (3) the finding that multi-step attack methods are somewhat less transferable than single-step attack methods, so single-step attacks are the best for mounting black-box attacks, and (4) resolution of a "label leaking" effect that causes adversarially trained models to perform better on adversarial examples than on clean examples, because the adversarial example construction process uses the true label and the model can learn to exploit regularities in the construction process.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1611.01236

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Fully decentralized variants of SGD and other optimization algorithms have recently been considered in machine learning both for improved scalability in datacenters and for decentralized networks of devices.

    “fully decentralized variants of SGD and other optimization algorithms have recently been considered in machine learning both for improved scalability in datacenters [29] as well as for decentralized networks of devices [127, 459, 443, 59, 278, 291, 173].”

    From Advances and Open Problems in Federated Learning (2021) · cites this paper as [443]

    The Experiments section (p. 4) describes synchronous distributed training on 50 machines, not a fully decentralized optimization method. Searches for decentralized SGD, datacenter scalability, and networks of devices found no passage addressing the attributed claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Takeru Miyato, Shin-ichi Maeda, Masanori Koyama, Ken Nakae, and Shin Ishii. Distributional smoothing with virtual adversarial training. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR2016) , April 2016b.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kurakin, A., Goodfellow, I., & Bengio, S.
Affiliations
Google (United States) (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2016
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2552767274
Cited by
2,325
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 93 · 2024: 264 · 2023: 259 · 2022: 281 · 2021: 475 · 2020: 447 · 2019: 329 · 2018: 143 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
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 › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Media Forensic Detection
Keywords
adversarial training, adversarial examples, adversarial robustness, black-box attacks, transferability, multi-stage attacks, ImageNet, large-scale machine learning

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