user: text: Write a concise one-sentence TLDR summary of the scientific paper content below.

Title: Neural Networks with Structural Resistance to Adversarial Attacks

Paper content:
In adversarial attacks to machine-learning classifiers, small perturbations are added to input that is correctly classified.
The perturbations yield adversarial examples, which are virtually indistinguishable from the unperturbed input, and yet are misclassified.
In standard neural networks used for deep learning, attackers can craft adversarial examples from most input to cause a misclassification of their choice.
We introduce a new type of network units, called RBFI units, whose non-linear structure makes them inherently resistant to adversarial attacks.
On permutation-invariant MNIST, in absence of adversarial attacks, networks using RBFI units match the performance of networks using sigmoid units, and are slightly below the accuracy of networks with ReLU units.
When subjected to adversarial attacks based on projected gradient descent or fast gradient-sign methods, networks with RBFI units retain accuracies above 75%, while ReLU or Sigmoid see their accuracies reduced to below 1%.
Further, RBFI networks trained on regular input either exceed or closely match the accuracy of sigmoid and ReLU network trained with the help of adversarial examples.
The non-linear structure of RBFI units makes them difficult to train using standard gradient descent.
We show that RBFI networks of RBFI units can be efficiently trained to high accuracies using pseudogradients, computed using functions especially crafted to facilitate learning instead of their true derivatives.
Machine learning via deep neural networks has been remarkably successful in a wide range of applications, from speech recognition to image classification and language processing.
While very successful, deep neural networks are affected by adversarial examples: small, especially crafter modifications of correctly classified input that are misclassified BID20 ).
The trouble with adversarial examples is twofold.
The modifications to regular input are so small as to be difficult or impossible to detect for a human: this has been shown both in the case of images BID20 ; BID14 ) and sounds BID9 ; BID5 ).
Further, the adversarial examples are in some measure transferable from one neural network to another BID7 ; BID14 ; BID16 ; BID22 ), so they can be crafted even without precise knowledge of the weights of the target neural network.
At a fundamental level, it is hard to provide guarantees about the behavior of a deep neural network, when every correctly classified input is tightly encircled by very similar, yet misclassified, inputs.Thus far, the approach for obtaining neural networks that are more resistant to adversarial attacks has been to feed to the networks, as training data, an appropriate mix of the original training data, and adversarial examples BID7 ; BID12 ).
In training neural networks using adversarial examples, if the examples are generated via efficient heuristics such as the fast gradient sign method, the networks learn to associate the specific adversarial examples to the original input from which they were derived, in a phenomenon known as label leaking BID10 ; BID12 ; BID21 ).
This does not result in increased resistance to general adversarial attacks BID12 ; BID4 ).
If the adversarial examples used in training are generated via more general optimization techniques, as in BID12 ), networks with markedly increased resistance to adversarial attacks can be obtained, at the price of a more complex and computationally expensive training regime, and an increase in required network capacity.We pursue here a different approach, proposing the use of neural network types that are, due to their structure, inherently impervious to adversarial attacks, even when trained on standard input only.
In BID7 ), the authors connect the presence of adversarial examples to the (local) linearity of neural networks.
In a purely linear form n i=1 x i w i , we can perturb each x i by , taking x i + if w i > 0, and x i − if w i < 0.
This causes an output perturbation of magnitude n i=1 |w i |, or nw forw the average modulus of w i .
When the number of inputs n is large, as is typical of deep neural networks, a small input perturbation can cause a large output change.
Of course, deep neural networks are not globally linear, but the insight of BID7 ) is that they may be sufficiently locally linear to allow adversarial attacks.
Following this insight, we develop networks composed of units that are highly non-linear.The networks on which we settled after much experimentation are a variant of the well known radial basis functions (RBFs) BID0 ; BID6 BID15 ); we call our variant RBFI units.
RBFI units are similar to classical Gaussian RBFs, except for two differences that are crucial in obtaining both high network accuracy, and high resistance to attacks.
First, rather than being radially symmetrical, RBFIs can scale each input component individually; in particular, they can be highly sensitive to some inputs while ignoring others.
This gives an individual RBFI unit the ability to cover more of the input space than its symmetrical variants.
Further, the distance of an input from the center of the Gaussian is measured not in the Euclidean, or 2 , norm, but in the infinity norm ∞ , which is equal to the maximum of the differences of the individual components.
This eliminates all multi-input linearity from the local behavior of a RBFI: at any point, the output depends on one input only; the n in the above discussion is always 1 for RBFIs, so to say.
The "I" in RBFI stands for the infinity norm.Using deeply nonlinear models is hardly a new idea, but the challenge has been that such models are typically difficult to train.
Indeed, we show that networks with RBFI units cannot be satisfactorily trained using gradient descent.
To get around this, we show that the networks can be trained efficiently, and to high accuracy, using pseudogradients.
A pseudogradient is computed just as an ordinary gradient, except that we artificially pretend that some functions have a derivative that is different from the true derivative, and especially crafted to facilitate training.
In particular, we use pseudoderivatives for the exponential function, and for the maximum operator, that enter the definition of Gaussian RBFI units.
Gaussians have very low derivative away from their center, which makes training difficult; our pseudoderivative artificially widens the region of detectable gradient around the Gaussian center.
The maximum operator appearing in the infinity norm has non-zero derivative only for one of its inputs at a time; we adopt a pseudogradient that propagates back the gradient to all of its inputs, according to their proximity in value to the maximum input.
Tampering with the gradient may seem unorthodox, but methods such as AdaDelta BID23 ), and even gradient descent with momentum, cause training to take a trajectory that does not follow pure gradient descent.
We simply go one step further, devising a scheme that operates at the granularity of the individual unit.We show that with these two changes, RBFIs can be easily trained with standard random (pseudo)gradient descent methods, yielding networks that are both accurate, and resistant to attacks.
To conduct our experiments, we have implemented RBFI networks on top of the PyTorch framework BID18 ).
The code will be made available in a final version of the paper.
We consider permutation invariant MNIST, which is a version of MNIST in which the 28 × 28 pixel images are flattened into a one-dimensional vector of 784 values and fed as a feature vector to neural networks BID7 ).
On this test set, we show that for nets of 512,512,512,10 units, RBFI networks match the classification accuracy of networks of sigmoid units ((96.96 ± 0.14)% for RBFI vs. (96.88 ± 0.15)% for sigmoid), and are close to the performance of network with ReLU units ((98.62 ± 0.08)%).
When trained over standard training sets, RBFI networks retain accuracies over 75% for adversarial attacks that reduce the accuracy of ReLU and sigmoid networks to below 2% (worse than random).
We show that RBFI networks trained on normal input are superior to ReLU and sigmoid networks trained even with adversarial examples.
Our experimental results can be summarized as follows:• In absence of adversarial attacks, RBFI networks match the accuracy of sigmoid networks, and are slightly lower in accuracy than ReLU networks.•
When networks are trained with regular input only, RBFI networks are markedly more resistant to adversarial attacks than sigmoid or ReLU networks.•
In presence of adversarial attacks, RBFI networks trained on regualar input provide higher accuracy than sigmoid or ReLU networks, even when the latter are trained also on adversarial examples, and even when the adversarial examples are obtained via general projected gradient descent BID12 ).•
RBFI networks can be successfully trained with pseudogradients; the training via standard gradient descent yields instead markedly inferior results.•
Appropriate regularization helps RBFI networks gain increased resistance to adversarial attacks.Much work remains to be done, including experimenting with convolutional networks using RBFI units for images. However
, the results seem promising, in that RBFI seem to offer a viable alternative to current adversarial training regimes in achieving robustness to adversarial attacks.
In this paper, we have shown that non-linear structures such as RBFI can be efficiently trained using artificial, "pseudo" gradients, and can attain both high accuracy and high resistance to adversarial attacks.

assistant: text: We introduce a type of neural network that is structurally resistant to adversarial attacks, even when trained on unaugmented training sets.  The resistance is due to the stability of network units wrt input perturbations.