Papers › The Impact of Uniform Inputs on Activation Sparsity and Energy-Latency Attacks in...

The Impact of Uniform Inputs on Activation Sparsity and Energy-Latency Attacks in Computer Vision

27 Mar 2024arXiv:2403.18587archive 2025-07-28

Andreas Müller, Erwin Quiring

Resource efficiency plays an important role for machine learning nowadays. The energy and decision latency are two critical aspects to ensure a sustainable and practical application. Unfortunately, the energy consumption and decision latency are not robust against adversaries. Researchers have recently demonstrated that attackers can compute and submit so-called sponge examples at inference time to increase the energy consumption and decision latency of neural networks. In computer vision, the proposed strategy crafts inputs with less activation sparsity which could otherwise be used to accelerate the computation. In this paper, we analyze the mechanism how these energy-latency attacks reduce activation sparsity. In particular, we find that input uniformity is a key enabler. A uniform image, that is, an image with mostly flat, uniformly colored surfaces, triggers more activations due to a specific interplay of convolution, batch normalization, and ReLU activation. Based on these insights, we propose two new simple, yet effective strategies for crafting sponge examples: sampling images from a probability distribution and identifying dense, yet inconspicuous inputs in natural datasets. We empirically examine our findings in a comprehensive evaluation with multiple image classification models and show that our attack achieves the same sparsity effect as prior sponge-example methods, but at a fraction of computation effort. We also show that our sponge examples transfer between different neural networks. Finally, we discuss applications of our findings for the good by improving efficiency by increasing sparsity.

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

7 samples harvested; 6 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: 0 of the 7 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 and-mill/2024-sponge-example-analysis. “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.

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