|
|
|
|
|
by SkyBelow
2330 days ago
|
|
Is there any particular reason to think this won't become another cat and mouse escalation as training algorithms have built in protection against this (and other related training set manipulations, especially the poisoning one the article talked about)? That isn't to say it is useless, as most cat and mouse escalations prove to be quite useful as long as the mouse stays a little ahead of the cat. In this case, wouldn't such a marker be able to be detected by looking at images of the same class and seeing if there are any common perturbation across them, adjusting the images by the common perturbation , and then training the neural network? Even if there isn't such a common perturbation across them, adjusting them by the false flag common perturbation generated shouldn't be any more destructive than this method would be. If there was a way to make it dependent upon the initial image and the class, that would be much harder to detect, but would such a method be possible to detect since all images within a class would not have the common perturbation? |
|