Researcher profile

Jonathan Brophy

Jonathan Brophy contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
5topics
4close 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

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Identifying Adversarial Attacks on Text Classifiers

The landscape of adversarial attacks against text classifiers continues to grow, with new attacks developed every year and many of them available in standard toolkits, such as TextAttack and OpenAttack. In response, there is a growing body of work on robust learning, which reduces vulnerability to these attacks, though sometimes at a high cost in compute time or accuracy. In this paper, we take an alternate approach -- we attempt to understand the attacker by analyzing adversarial text to determine which methods were used to create it. Our first contribution is an extensive dataset for attack detection and labeling: 1.5~million attack instances, generated by twelve adversarial attacks targeting three classifiers trained on six source datasets for sentiment analysis and abuse detection in English. As our second contribution, we use this dataset to develop and benchmark a number of classifiers for attack identification -- determining if a given text has been adversarially manipulated and by which attack. As a third contribution, we demonstrate the effectiveness of three classes of features for these tasks: text properties, capturing content and presentation of text; language model properties, determining which tokens are more or less probable throughout the input; and target model properties, representing how the text classifier is influenced by the attack, including internal node activations. Overall, this represents a first step towards forensics for adversarial attacks against text classifiers.

preprint2020arXiv

EGGS: A Flexible Approach to Relational Modeling of Social Network Spam

Social networking websites face a constant barrage of spam, unwanted messages that distract, annoy, and even defraud honest users. These messages tend to be very short, making them difficult to identify in isolation. Furthermore, spammers disguise their messages to look legitimate, tricking users into clicking on links and tricking spam filters into tolerating their malicious behavior. Thus, some spam filters examine relational structure in the domain, such as connections among users and messages, to better identify deceptive content. However, even when it is used, relational structure is often exploited in an incomplete or ad hoc manner. In this paper, we present Extended Group-based Graphical models for Spam (EGGS), a general-purpose method for classifying spam in online social networks. Rather than labeling each message independently, we group related messages together when they have the same author, the same content, or other domain-specific connections. To reason about related messages, we combine two popular methods: stacked graphical learning (SGL) and probabilistic graphical models (PGM). Both methods capture the idea that messages are more likely to be spammy when related messages are also spammy, but they do so in different ways; SGL uses sequential classifier predictions and PGMs use probabilistic inference. We apply our method to four different social network domains. EGGS is more accurate than an independent model in most experimental settings, especially when the correct label is uncertain. For the PGM implementation, we compare Markov logic networks to probabilistic soft logic and find that both work well with neither one dominating, and the combination of SGL and PGMs usually performs better than either on its own.