Papers › Enhancing Neural Models with Vulnerability via Adversarial Attack

Enhancing Neural Models with Vulnerability via Adversarial Attack

1 Dec 2020COLING 2020 8archive 2025-07-28

Rong Zhang, Qifei Zhou, Bo An, Weiping Li, Tong Mo, Bo Wu

Natural Language Sentence Matching (NLSM) serves as the core of many natural language processing tasks. 1) Most previous work develops a single specific neural model for NLSM tasks. 2) There is no previous work considering adversarial attack to improve the performance of NLSM tasks. 3) Adversarial attack is usually used to generate adversarial samples that can fool neural models. In this paper, we first find a phenomenon that different categories of samples have different vulnerabilities. Vulnerability is the difficulty degree in changing the label of a sample. Considering the phenomenon, we propose a general two-stage training framework to enhance neural models with Vulnerability via Adversarial Attack (VAA). We design criteria to measure the vulnerability which is obtained by adversarial attack. VAA framework can be adapted to various neural models by incorporating the vulnerability. In addition, we prove a theorem and four corollaries to explain the factors influencing vulnerability effectiveness. Experimental results show that VAA significantly improves the performance of neural models on NLSM datasets. The results are also consistent with the theorem and corollaries. The code is released on https://github.com/rzhangpku/VAA.

PaperPDFCode

Code

rzhangpku/vaa officialmentioned in paperpytorch report

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

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Adversarial AttackSentence

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