Papers › Revisiting Adversarial Training under Long-Tailed Distributions

Revisiting Adversarial Training under Long-Tailed Distributions

15 Mar 2024CVPR 2024 1arXiv:2403.10073archive 2025-07-28

Xinli Yue, Ningping Mou, Qian Wang, Lingchen Zhao

Deep neural networks are vulnerable to adversarial attacks, often leading to erroneous outputs. Adversarial training has been recognized as one of the most effective methods to counter such attacks. However, existing adversarial training techniques have predominantly been tested on balanced datasets, whereas real-world data often exhibit a long-tailed distribution, casting doubt on the efficacy of these methods in practical scenarios. In this paper, we delve into adversarial training under long-tailed distributions. Through an analysis of the previous work "RoBal", we discover that utilizing Balanced Softmax Loss alone can achieve performance comparable to the complete RoBal approach while significantly reducing training overheads. Additionally, we reveal that, similar to uniform distributions, adversarial training under long-tailed distributions also suffers from robust overfitting. To address this, we explore data augmentation as a solution and unexpectedly discover that, unlike results obtained with balanced data, data augmentation not only effectively alleviates robust overfitting but also significantly improves robustness. We further investigate the reasons behind the improvement of robustness through data augmentation and identify that it is attributable to the increased diversity of examples. Extensive experiments further corroborate that data augmentation alone can significantly improve robustness. Finally, building on these findings, we demonstrate that compared to RoBal, the combination of BSL and data augmentation leads to a +6.66% improvement in model robustness under AutoAttack on CIFAR-10-LT. Our code is available at https://github.com/NISPLab/AT-BSL .

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

6 samples harvested; 5 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 1 has 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: 6 of the 6 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 NISPLab/AT-BSL. “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