Researcher profile

Blerta Lindqvist

Blerta Lindqvist contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
2topics
1close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Target Training Does Adversarial Training Without Adversarial Samples

Neural network classifiers are vulnerable to misclassification of adversarial samples, for which the current best defense trains classifiers with adversarial samples. However, adversarial samples are not optimal for steering attack convergence, based on the minimization at the core of adversarial attacks. The minimization perturbation term can be minimized towards $0$ by replacing adversarial samples in training with duplicated original samples, labeled differently only for training. Using only original samples, Target Training eliminates the need to generate adversarial samples for training against all attacks that minimize perturbation. In low-capacity classifiers and without using adversarial samples, Target Training exceeds both default CIFAR10 accuracy ($84.3$%) and current best defense accuracy (below $25$%) with $84.8$% against CW-L$_2$($κ=0$) attack, and $86.6$% against DeepFool. Using adversarial samples against attacks that do not minimize perturbation, Target Training exceeds current best defense ($69.1$%) with $76.4$% against CW-L$_2$($κ=40$) in CIFAR10.

preprint2020arXiv

Minimax Defense against Gradient-based Adversarial Attacks

State-of-the-art adversarial attacks are aimed at neural network classifiers. By default, neural networks use gradient descent to minimize their loss function. The gradient of a classifier's loss function is used by gradient-based adversarial attacks to generate adversarially perturbed images. We pose the question whether another type of optimization could give neural network classifiers an edge. Here, we introduce a novel approach that uses minimax optimization to foil gradient-based adversarial attacks. Our minimax classifier is the discriminator of a generative adversarial network (GAN) that plays a minimax game with the GAN generator. In addition, our GAN generator projects all points onto a manifold that is different from the original manifold since the original manifold might be the cause of adversarial attacks. To measure the performance of our minimax defense, we use adversarial attacks - Carlini Wagner (CW), DeepFool, Fast Gradient Sign Method (FGSM) - on three datasets: MNIST, CIFAR-10 and German Traffic Sign (TRAFFIC). Against CW attacks, our minimax defense achieves 98.07% (MNIST-default 98.93%), 73.90% (CIFAR-10-default 83.14%) and 94.54% (TRAFFIC-default 96.97%). Against DeepFool attacks, our minimax defense achieves 98.87% (MNIST), 76.61% (CIFAR-10) and 94.57% (TRAFFIC). Against FGSM attacks, we achieve 97.01% (MNIST), 76.79% (CIFAR-10) and 81.41% (TRAFFIC). Our Minimax adversarial approach presents a significant shift in defense strategy for neural network classifiers.

preprint2020arXiv

Tricking Adversarial Attacks To Fail

Recent adversarial defense approaches have failed. Untargeted gradient-based attacks cause classifiers to choose any wrong class. Our novel white-box defense tricks untargeted attacks into becoming attacks targeted at designated target classes. From these target classes, we can derive the real classes. Our Target Training defense tricks the minimization at the core of untargeted, gradient-based adversarial attacks: minimize the sum of (1) perturbation and (2) classifier adversarial loss. Target Training changes the classifier minimally, and trains it with additional duplicated points (at 0 distance) labeled with designated classes. These differently-labeled duplicated samples minimize both terms (1) and (2) of the minimization, steering attack convergence to samples of designated classes, from which correct classification is derived. Importantly, Target Training eliminates the need to know the attack and the overhead of generating adversarial samples of attacks that minimize perturbations. We obtain an 86.2% accuracy for CW-L2 (confidence=0) in CIFAR10, exceeding even unsecured classifier accuracy on non-adversarial samples. Target Training presents a fundamental change in adversarial defense strategy.