adversarial domain adaptation and adversarial robustness
play

Adversarial Domain Adaptation and Adversarial Robustness Judy - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Adversarial Domain Adaptation and Adversarial Robustness Judy Hoffman + = Big Deep success data learning Benchmark Performance 100 95 Accuracy 90 85 Millions of Images 80 Deep models 75 Challenge to recognize 1000


  1. Adversarial Domain Adaptation and Adversarial Robustness Judy Hoffman

  2. + = Big Deep success data learning

  3. Benchmark Performance 100 95 Accuracy 90 85 Millions of Images 
 80 Deep models 75 Challenge to recognize 
 1000 categories 70 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

  4. Dataset Bias ? Test Image Deep Model

  5. Dataset Bias ? Test Image Deep Model

  6. Dataset Bias Dog is not recognized ? Test Image Deep Model

  7. Dataset Bias

  8. Dataset Bias Low resolution

  9. Dataset Bias Motion Blur Low resolution

  10. Dataset Bias Motion Blur Pose Variety Low resolution

  11. Why not collect new annotations?

  12. Why not collect new annotations? Sky Car Vegetation Road Street Sign Sidewalk Building Person

  13. Why not collect new annotations? Expensive 
 ($10-12 per image) Sky Car Vegetation Road Street Sign Sidewalk Building Person

  14. Why not collect new annotations? Expensive 
 ($10-12 per image) Sky Car Large Potential for Change Vegetation Road Different: Weather, City, Car Street Sign Sidewalk Building Person

  15. Why not collect new annotations? Proprietary Private

  16. Domain Adaptation : Train on Source Test on Target Adapt Source Domain Target Domain ∼ P T ( X T , Y T ) ∼ P S ( X S , Y S ) lots of labeled data unlabeled or limited labels

  17. Adversarial Domain Adaptation bottle y s Source feature 
 vector Classifier Source x s CNN Source Data Ganin & Lempinsky, ICML 2015. Tzeng*, Hoffman * , Saenko, Darrell, ICCV 2015. Tzeng, Hoffman, Saenko, Darrell. CVPR 2017.

  18. Adversarial Domain Adaptation bottle y s Source feature 
 vector Classifier Source x s CNN Source Data Target feature 
 vector Target x t CNN Target Data Ganin & Lempinsky, ICML 2015. Tzeng*, Hoffman * , Saenko, Darrell, ICCV 2015. Tzeng, Hoffman, Saenko, Darrell. CVPR 2017.

  19. Adversarial Domain Adaptation bottle y s Source feature 
 vector Classifier Source x s CNN Source Data Target feature 
 vector Minimize Discrepancy Target x t CNN Target Data Ganin & Lempinsky, ICML 2015. Tzeng*, Hoffman * , Saenko, Darrell, ICCV 2015. Tzeng, Hoffman, Saenko, Darrell. CVPR 2017.

  20. Adversarial Domain Adaptation bottle y s Source feature 
 vector Classifier Domain 
 Classifier Source x s CNN Source Data Target feature 
 vector Minimize Discrepancy Target x t CNN Target Data Ganin & Lempinsky, ICML 2015. Tzeng*, Hoffman * , Saenko, Darrell, ICCV 2015. Tzeng, Hoffman, Saenko, Darrell. CVPR 2017.

  21. Adversarial Domain Adaptation bottle y s Source feature 
 vector Classifier Adversarial 
 Domain 
 Loss Classifier Source x s CNN Source Data Target feature 
 vector Minimize Discrepancy Target x t CNN Target Data Ganin & Lempinsky, ICML 2015. Tzeng*, Hoffman * , Saenko, Darrell, ICCV 2015. Tzeng, Hoffman, Saenko, Darrell. CVPR 2017.

  22. Adversarial Domain Adaptation bottle y s Classifier Adversarial 
 Domain 
 Loss Classifier Source CNN Source Data Minimize Discrepancy Target Data Liu 2016. Taigman 2016. Bousmalis 2017. Liu 2017. Kim 2017. Sankaranarayanan 2018. Hoffman 2018.

  23. CyCADA: Cycle Consistent Adversarial DA Semantically Source Data Consistent Domain Adversarial Source to Target Cycle Consistent Target to Source Target Data Reconstructed 
 Source Data Hoffman et.al. ICML 2018

  24. Synthetic to Real Pixel Adaptation Train Test GTA (synthetic) CityScapes (Germany) Hoffman et.al. ICML 2018

  25. Synthetic to Real Pixel Adaptation Hoffman et.al. ICML 2018

  26. Synthetic to Real Pixel Adaptation Hoffman et.al. ICML 2018

  27. Synthetic to Real Pixel Adaptation Zhu*, Park*, Isola, Efros. ICCV 2017.

  28. Synthetic to Real Pixel Adaptation Zhu*, Park*, Isola, Efros. ICCV 2017.

  29. CyCADA Results: CityScapes Evaluation Car CityScapes Image Ground Truth Road Sidewalk Person Sky Vegetation Street Sign Building Before Adaptation After Adaptation Hoffman et.al. ICML 2018

  30. CyCADA Results: CityScapes Evaluation Car CityScapes Image Ground Truth Road Sidewalk Person Sky Vegetation Street Sign Building Before Adaptation After Adaptation Hoffman et.al. ICML 2018

  31. CyCADA Results: CityScapes Evaluation Car CityScapes Image Ground Truth Road Sidewalk Person Sky Vegetation Street Sign Building Before Adaptation After Adaptation Hoffman et.al. ICML 2018

  32. So Far: Adapting to Natural Shifts Adapt

  33. So Far: Adapting to Natural Shifts Adapt

  34. What about adversarial shifts?

  35. Adversarial Examples + . 007 ⇥ = x + sign ( r x J ( θ , x , y )) x ✏ sign ( r x J ( θ , x , y )) “panda” “nematode” “gibbon” 57.7% confidence 8.2% confidence 99.3 % confidence Goodfellow et al. ICLR 2015.

  36. Visualize Perturbation Space

  37. Visualize Perturbation Space Training point 28 28

  38. Visualize Perturbation Space Training point Vectorize 28 784 28

  39. Visualize Perturbation Space Training point Vectorize 28 784 Project onto random 2D 28 orthonormal basis

  40. Visualize Perturbation Space Training point Vectorize Sweep over a grid of perturbations 28 784 Project onto random 2D 28 orthonormal basis

  41. Visualize Perturbation Space Training point Vectorize Sweep over a grid of perturbations 28 784 Project onto random 2D 28 Perturbed Image orthonormal basis

  42. Visualize Perturbation Space Training point Vectorize Sweep over a grid of Model Score perturbations 28 784 Project onto random 2D 28 Perturbed Image orthonormal basis

  43. MNIST LeNet Decisions Around Training Point

  44. MNIST LeNet Decisions Around Training Point Training Data Point

  45. MNIST LeNet Decisions Around Training Point Training Data Point

  46. MNIST LeNet Decisions Around Training Point Non-smooth Decision Boundary Training Data Point

  47. MNIST LeNet Decisions Around Training Point Non-smooth Decision Boundary Training Small perturbations Data Point lead to new outputs

  48. MNIST LeNet with L2 Regularization Smooth Decision Boundary Small perturbations lead to new outputs

  49. MNIST LeNet with L2 Regularization Smooth Decision Boundary Small perturbations lead to new outputs

  50. Jacobian Regularization y s bottle score vector x s Classifier z s Hoffman, Roberts, Yaida, In submission, 2019.

  51. Jacobian Regularization y s bottle score vector x s Classifier z s Input-output 
 Jacobian matrix J c,i = ∂ z c ∂ x i Hoffman, Roberts, Yaida, In submission, 2019.

  52. Jacobian Regularization y s bottle score vector x s Classifier z s Input-output 
 Minimize 
 Jacobian matrix Frobenius Norm J c,i = ∂ z c || J || 2 F ∂ x i Hoffman, Roberts, Yaida, In submission, 2019.

  53. MNIST LeNet with Jacobian Regularization Mostly Smooth Decision Boundary Larger perturbations needed to lead to new outputs

  54. MNIST LeNet with Jacobian Regularization Mostly Smooth Decision Boundary Larger perturbations needed to lead to new outputs

  55. Decision Boundary Comparison No 
 L2 
 Jacobian 
 Regularization Regularization Regularization Hoffman, Roberts, Yaida, In submission, 2019.

  56. Robustness to Random Perturbations MNIST LeNet Model Hoffman, Roberts, Yaida, In submission, 2019.

  57. Robustness to Adversarial Perturbations Hoffman, Roberts, Yaida, In submission, 2019.

  58. Next Steps Jacobian regularizer as unsupervised adaptive loss? Domain Adversarial Adaptation Robustness Adaptation to an adversarial domain?

  59. Thank you Taesung Park Jun-Yan Zhu Dan Roberts Eric Tzeng UC Berkeley MIT Diffeo UC Berkeley Phil Isola Kate Saenko Trevor Darrell Alyosha Efros Sho Yaida MIT Boston University UC Berkeley UC Berkeley FAIR

  60. Judy Hoffman judyhoffman.io

Recommend


More recommend