Papers › Protecting Neural Networks with Hierarchical Random Switching: Towards Better...
Protecting Neural Networks with Hierarchical Random Switching: Towards Better Robustness-Accuracy Trade-off for Stochastic Defenses
Xiao Wang, Siyue Wang, Pin-Yu Chen, Yanzhi Wang, Brian Kulis, Xue Lin, Peter Chin
Despite achieving remarkable success in various domains, recent studies have uncovered the vulnerability of deep neural networks to adversarial perturbations, creating concerns on model generalizability and new threats such as prediction-evasive misclassification or stealthy reprogramming. Among different defense proposals, stochastic network defenses such as random neuron activation pruning or random perturbation to layer inputs are shown to be promising for attack mitigation. However, one critical drawback of current defenses is that the robustness enhancement is at the cost of noticeable performance degradation on legitimate data, e.g., large drop in test accuracy. This paper is motivated by pursuing for a better trade-off between adversarial robustness and test accuracy for stochastic network defenses. We propose Defense Efficiency Score (DES), a comprehensive metric that measures the gain in unsuccessful attack attempts at the cost of drop in test accuracy of any defense. To achieve a better DES, we propose hierarchical random switching (HRS), which protects neural networks through a novel randomization scheme. A HRS-protected model contains several blocks of randomly switching channels to prevent adversaries from exploiting fixed model structures and parameters for their malicious purposes. Extensive experiments show that HRS is superior in defending against state-of-the-art white-box and adaptive adversarial misclassification attacks. We also demonstrate the effectiveness of HRS in defending adversarial reprogramming, which is the first defense against adversarial programs. Moreover, in most settings the average DES of HRS is at least 5X higher than current stochastic network defenses, validating its significantly improved robustness-accuracy trade-off.
In Syntology View this paper on Syntology: its repositories, every harvested function with whether it ran, its licence and the call to fetch it.
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="1908.07116")
Code
Syntology Ran 0 of 2 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 2 have no recorded run.
By repository: official repository: 2 samples from 1 repository, 0 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
2 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-25; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 2 samples are 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 KieranXWang/HRS. “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.
dd34dcbcc3221a9e · report
b595c3277f371195 · report
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