REVIEW 1 cited by
On the Robustness of Large Multimodal Models Against Image Adversarial Attacks
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Recent advances in instruction tuning have led to the development of State-of-the-Art Large Multimodal Models (LMMs). Given the novelty of these models, the impact of visual adversarial attacks on LMMs has not been thoroughly examined. We conduct a comprehensive study of the robustness of various LMMs against different adversarial attacks, evaluated across tasks including image classification, image captioning, and Visual Question Answer (VQA). We find that in general LMMs are not robust to visual adversarial inputs. However, our findings suggest that context provided to the model via prompts, such as questions in a QA pair helps to mitigate the effects of visual adversarial inputs. Notably, the LMMs evaluated demonstrated remarkable resilience to such attacks on the ScienceQA task with only an 8.10% drop in performance compared to their visual counterparts which dropped 99.73%. We also propose a new approach to real-world image classification which we term query decomposition. By incorporating existence queries into our input prompt we observe diminished attack effectiveness and improvements in image classification accuracy. This research highlights a previously under-explored facet of LMM robustness and sets the stage for future work aimed at strengthening the resilience of multimodal systems in adversarial environments.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Invisible Injections: Exploiting Vision-Language Models Through Steganographic Prompt Embedding
Steganographic prompt injection is reported to covertly manipulate vision-language models with up to 31.8% success, but the evidence is not reproducible.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.