Efficiently solving unbalanced three-phase power flow in distribution grids is pivotal for grid analysis and simulation. There is a pressing need for scalable algorithms capable of handling large-scale unbalanced power grids that can provide accurate and fast solutions. To address this, deep learning techniques, especially Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), have emerged. However, existing literature primarily focuses on balanced networks, leaving a critical gap in supporting unbalanced three-phase power grids. This letter introduces PowerFlowMultiNet, a novel multigraph GNN framework explicitly designed for unbalanced three-phase power grids. The proposed approach models each phase separately in a multigraph representation, effectively capturing the inherent asymmetry in unbalanced grids. A graph embedding mechanism utilizing message passing is introduced to capture spatial dependencies within the power system network. PowerFlowMultiNet outperforms traditional methods and other deep learning approaches in terms of accuracy and computational speed. Rigorous testing reveals significantly lower error rates and a notable hundredfold increase in computational speed for large power networks compared to model-based methods.
State-of-the-art deep learning models for tabular data have recently achieved acceptable performance to be deployed in industrial settings. However, the robustness of these models remains scarcely explored. Contrary to computer vision, there is to date no realistic protocol to properly evaluate the adversarial robustness of deep tabular models due to intrinsic properties of tabular data such as categorical features, immutability, and feature relationship constraints. To fill this gap, we propose CAA, the first efficient evasion attack for constrained tabular deep learning models. CAA is an iterative parameter-free attack that combines gradient and search attacks to generate adversarial examples under constraints. We leverage CAA to build a benchmark of deep tabular models across three popular use cases: credit scoring, phishing and botnet attacks detection. Our benchmark supports ten threat models with increasing capabilities of the attacker, and reflects real-world attack scenarios for each use case. Overall, our results demonstrate how domain knowledge, adversarial training, and attack budgets impact the robustness assessment of deep tabular models and provide security practitioners with a set of recommendations to improve the robustness of deep tabular models against various evasion attack scenarios.
Much research on Machine Learning testing relies on empirical studies that evaluate and show their potential. However, in this context empirical results are sensitive to a number of parameters that can adversely impact the results of the experiments and potentially lead to wrong conclusions (Type I errors, i.e., incorrectly rejecting the Null Hypothesis). To this end, we survey the related literature and identify 10 commonly adopted empirical evaluation hazards that may significantly impact experimental results. We then perform a sensitivity analysis on 30 influential studies that were published in top-tier SE venues, against our hazard set and demonstrate their criticality. Our findings indicate that all 10 hazards we identify have the potential to invalidate experimental findings, such as those made by the related literature, and should be handled properly. Going a step further, we propose a point set of 10 good empirical practices that has the potential to mitigate the impact of the hazards. We believe our work forms the first step towards raising awareness of the common pitfalls and good practices within the software engineering community and hopefully contribute towards setting particular expectations for empirical research in the field of deep learning testing.
Natural Language Processing (NLP) models based on Machine Learning (ML) are susceptible to adversarial attacks -- malicious algorithms that imperceptibly modify input text to force models into making incorrect predictions. However, evaluations of these attacks ignore the property of imperceptibility or study it under limited settings. This entails that adversarial perturbations would not pass any human quality gate and do not represent real threats to human-checked NLP systems. To bypass this limitation and enable proper assessment (and later, improvement) of NLP model robustness, we have surveyed 378 human participants about the perceptibility of text adversarial examples produced by state-of-the-art methods. Our results underline that existing text attacks are impractical in real-world scenarios where humans are involved. This contrasts with previous smaller-scale human studies, which reported overly optimistic conclusions regarding attack success. Through our work, we hope to position human perceptibility as a first-class success criterion for text attacks, and provide guidance for research to build effective attack algorithms and, in turn, design appropriate defence mechanisms.
While leveraging additional training data is well established to improve adversarial robustness, it incurs the unavoidable cost of data collection and the heavy computation to train models. To mitigate the costs, we propose \textit{Guided Adversarial Training } (GAT), a novel adversarial training technique that exploits auxiliary tasks under a limited set of training data. Our approach extends single-task models into multi-task models during the min-max optimization of adversarial training, and drives the loss optimization with a regularization of the gradient curvature across multiple tasks. GAT leverages two types of auxiliary tasks: self-supervised tasks, where the labels are generated automatically, and domain-knowledge tasks, where human experts provide additional labels. Experimentally, under limited data, GAT increases the robust accuracy on CIFAR-10 up to four times (from 11% to 42% robust accuracy) and the robust AUC of CheXpert medical imaging dataset from 50\% to 83\%. On the full CIFAR-10 dataset, GAT outperforms eight state-of-the-art adversarial training strategies. Our large study across five datasets and six tasks demonstrates that task augmentation is an efficient alternative to data augmentation, and can be key to achieving both clean and robust performances.
Vulnerability to adversarial attacks is a well-known weakness of Deep Neural Networks. While most of the studies focus on natural images with standardized benchmarks like ImageNet and CIFAR, little research has considered real world applications, in particular in the medical domain. Our research shows that, contrary to previous claims, robustness of chest x-ray classification is much harder to evaluate and leads to very different assessments based on the dataset, the architecture and robustness metric. We argue that previous studies did not take into account the peculiarity of medical diagnosis, like the co-occurrence of diseases, the disagreement of labellers (domain experts), the threat model of the attacks and the risk implications for each successful attack. In this paper, we discuss the methodological foundations, review the pitfalls and best practices, and suggest new methodological considerations for evaluating the robustness of chest xray classification models. Our evaluation on 3 datasets, 7 models, and 18 diseases is the largest evaluation of robustness of chest x-ray classification models.
While the literature on security attacks and defense of Machine Learning (ML) systems mostly focuses on unrealistic adversarial examples, recent research has raised concern about the under-explored field of realistic adversarial attacks and their implications on the robustness of real-world systems. Our paper paves the way for a better understanding of adversarial robustness against realistic attacks and makes two major contributions. First, we conduct a study on three real-world use cases (text classification, botnet detection, malware detection)) and five datasets in order to evaluate whether unrealistic adversarial examples can be used to protect models against realistic examples. Our results reveal discrepancies across the use cases, where unrealistic examples can either be as effective as the realistic ones or may offer only limited improvement. Second, to explain these results, we analyze the latent representation of the adversarial examples generated with realistic and unrealistic attacks. We shed light on the patterns that discriminate which unrealistic examples can be used for effective hardening. We release our code, datasets and models to support future research in exploring how to reduce the gap between unrealistic and realistic adversarial attacks.
The generation of feasible adversarial examples is necessary for properly assessing models that work on constrained feature space. However, it remains a challenging task to enforce constraints into attacks that were designed for computer vision. We propose a unified framework to generate feasible adversarial examples that satisfy given domain constraints. Our framework supports the use cases reported in the literature and can handle both linear and non-linear constraints. We instantiate our framework into two algorithms: a gradient-based attack that introduces constraints in the loss function to maximize, and a multi-objective search algorithm that aims for misclassification, perturbation minimization, and constraint satisfaction. We show that our approach is effective on two datasets from different domains, with a success rate of up to 100%, where state-of-the-art attacks fail to generate a single feasible example. In addition to adversarial retraining, we propose to introduce engineered non-convex constraints to improve model adversarial robustness. We demonstrate that this new defense is as effective as adversarial retraining. Our framework forms the starting point for research on constrained adversarial attacks and provides relevant baselines and datasets that future research can exploit.
Vulnerability to adversarial attacks is a well-known weakness of Deep Neural networks. While most of the studies focus on single-task neural networks with computer vision datasets, very little research has considered complex multi-task models that are common in real applications. In this paper, we evaluate the design choices that impact the robustness of multi-task deep learning networks. We provide evidence that blindly adding auxiliary tasks, or weighing the tasks provides a false sense of robustness. Thereby, we tone down the claim made by previous research and study the different factors which may affect robustness. In particular, we show that the choice of the task to incorporate in the loss function are important factors that can be leveraged to yield more robust models.