Abstract:Autonomous vehicle navigation and healthcare diagnostics are among the many fields where the reliability and security of machine learning models for image data are critical. We conduct a comprehensive investigation into the susceptibility of Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), which are widely used for image data, to white-box adversarial attacks. We investigate the effects of various sophisticated attacks -- Fast Gradient Sign Method, Basic Iterative Method, Jacobian-based Saliency Map Attack, Carlini & Wagner, Projected Gradient Descent, and DeepFool -- on CNN performance metrics, (e.g., loss, accuracy), the differential efficacy of adversarial techniques in increasing error rates, the relationship between perceived image quality metrics (e.g., ERGAS, PSNR, SSIM, and SAM) and classification performance, and the comparative effectiveness of iterative versus single-step attacks. Using the MNIST, CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, and Fashio_MNIST datasets, we explore the effect of different attacks on the CNNs performance metrics by varying the hyperparameters of CNNs. Our study provides insights into the robustness of CNNs against adversarial threats, pinpoints vulnerabilities, and underscores the urgent need for developing robust defense mechanisms to protect CNNs and ensuring their trustworthy deployment in real-world scenarios.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problems that this paper attempts to solve are: the vulnerability and security issues of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) when facing white - box adversarial attacks. Specifically, by systematically evaluating the impact of multiple white - box adversarial attack methods on the performance and reliability of CNNs, the author aims to reveal how these attacks affect the accuracy of image classification, loss, and other performance metrics, and explore the differences in the effectiveness of different attack methods. In addition, the study also investigates the impact of adversarial attacks on perceptual image quality metrics (such as ERGAS, PSNR, SSIM, and SAM), as well as the comparison of the effects between iterative attacks and single - step attacks.
### Research Background
With the wide application of machine - learning models in critical fields such as autonomous driving and medical diagnosis, ensuring the safety and reliability of these models has become extremely important. As an emerging threat means, adversarial attacks can mislead the decision - making process of models by introducing subtle but fatal perturbations. Therefore, understanding and mitigating these attacks are of urgent significance for ensuring the trustworthy deployment of AI systems.
### Main Objectives
1. **Evaluate the impact of adversarial attacks on the accuracy and integrity of image classification.**
2. **Identify the attack methods that cause a significant decline in performance metrics.**
3. **Provide insights for developing more robust CNN architectures and training processes.**
### Research Questions
1. **How do different types of white - box adversarial attacks affect the classification accuracy of CNNs?**
2. **Which adversarial attack is the most effective in inducing the highest error rate?**
3. **What is the relationship between perceptual image quality metrics and the classification performance of CNNs under attack?**
4. **What are the differences in effectiveness between iterative attacks (such as BIM, PGD) and single - step attacks (such as FGSM)?**
### Methods and Results
The researchers used multiple datasets including MNIST, CIFAR - 10, CIFAR - 100, and Fashion MNIST, and applied multiple white - box adversarial attack methods (such as FGSM, BIM, JSMA, C&W, PGD, and DeepFool). Through experiments, they found that:
- The DeepFool attack significantly reduces the accuracy of the model, indicating that it is very effective in using a large amount of data modification.
- Although the FGSM attack does not cause as serious a decline in accuracy as DeepFool, it performs better in terms of image synthesis quality (lower ERGAS value).
- The JSMA attack has the highest peak error, but it performs well in maintaining the similarity between the attacked image and the original image (lower SAM value).
- Iterative attacks (such as BIM and PGD) are more effective than single - step attacks (such as FGSM) because they can gradually optimize the attack effect by fine - tuning the perturbation multiple times.
### Conclusion
The study shows that existing CNN models are still very vulnerable when facing well - designed adversarial attacks. In order to improve the robustness and security of the model, future research needs to focus on developing more effective defense mechanisms to ensure that CNNs can operate reliably in practical application scenarios.