Papers › An Analysis of Adversarial Attacks and Defenses on Autonomous Driving Models
An Analysis of Adversarial Attacks and Defenses on Autonomous Driving Models
Yao Deng, Xi Zheng, Tianyi Zhang, Chen Chen, Guannan Lou, Miryung Kim
Nowadays, autonomous driving has attracted much attention from both industry and academia. Convolutional neural network (CNN) is a key component in autonomous driving, which is also increasingly adopted in pervasive computing such as smartphones, wearable devices, and IoT networks. Prior work shows CNN-based classification models are vulnerable to adversarial attacks. However, it is uncertain to what extent regression models such as driving models are vulnerable to adversarial attacks, the effectiveness of existing defense techniques, and the defense implications for system and middleware builders. This paper presents an in-depth analysis of five adversarial attacks and four defense methods on three driving models. Experiments show that, similar to classification models, these models are still highly vulnerable to adversarial attacks. This poses a big security threat to autonomous driving and thus should be taken into account in practice. While these defense methods can effectively defend against different attacks, none of them are able to provide adequate protection against all five attacks. We derive several implications for system and middleware builders: (1) when adding a defense component against adversarial attacks, it is important to deploy multiple defense methods in tandem to achieve a good coverage of various attacks, (2) a blackbox attack is much less effective compared with a white-box attack, implying that it is important to keep model details (e.g., model architecture, hyperparameters) confidential via model obfuscation, and (3) driving models with a complex architecture are preferred if computing resources permit as they are more resilient to adversarial attacks than simple models.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2002.02175")
Code
Syntology Ran 1 of 1 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · our draft was wrong.
By repository: official repository: 1 sample from 1 repository, 1 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
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 ITSEG-MQ/Adv-attack-and-defense-on-driving-model. “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.
32bc6a28a0e7d064 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
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