Papers › Adversarial Training for Improving Model Robustness? Look at Both Prediction and Interpretation

Adversarial Training for Improving Model Robustness? Look at Both Prediction and Interpretation

23 Mar 2022arXiv:2203.12709archive 2025-07-28

Hanjie Chen, Yangfeng Ji

Neural language models show vulnerability to adversarial examples which are semantically similar to their original counterparts with a few words replaced by their synonyms. A common way to improve model robustness is adversarial training which follows two steps-collecting adversarial examples by attacking a target model, and fine-tuning the model on the augmented dataset with these adversarial examples. The objective of traditional adversarial training is to make a model produce the same correct predictions on an original/adversarial example pair. However, the consistency between model decision-makings on two similar texts is ignored. We argue that a robust model should behave consistently on original/adversarial example pairs, that is making the same predictions (what) based on the same reasons (how) which can be reflected by consistent interpretations. In this work, we propose a novel feature-level adversarial training method named FLAT. FLAT aims at improving model robustness in terms of both predictions and interpretations. FLAT incorporates variational word masks in neural networks to learn global word importance and play as a bottleneck teaching the model to make predictions based on important words. FLAT explicitly shoots at the vulnerability problem caused by the mismatch between model understandings on the replaced words and their synonyms in original/adversarial example pairs by regularizing the corresponding global word importance scores. Experiments show the effectiveness of FLAT in improving the robustness with respect to both predictions and interpretations of four neural network models (LSTM, CNN, BERT, and DeBERTa) to two adversarial attacks on four text classification tasks. The models trained via FLAT also show better robustness than baseline models on unforeseen adversarial examples across different attacks.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

1 sample harvested; 1 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 1 of the 1 sample is pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from UVa-NLP/FLAT. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections