Are Defenses for Graph Neural Networks Robust?

Felix Mujkanovic, Simon Geisler, Stephan Günnemann, Aleksandar Bojchevski
1/31/2023
cs.LG

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 2 possible matches can be shown below.

Abstract

A cursory reading of the literature suggests that we have made a lot of progress in designing effective adversarial defenses for Graph Neural Networks (GNNs). Yet, the standard methodology has a serious flaw - virtually all of the defenses are evaluated against non-adaptive attacks leading to overly optimistic robustness estimates. We perform a thorough robustness analysis of 7 of the most popular defenses spanning the entire spectrum of strategies, i.e., aimed at improving the graph, the architecture, or the training. The results are sobering - most defenses show no or only marginal improvement compared to an undefended baseline. We advocate using custom adaptive attacks as a gold standard and we outline the lessons we learned from successfully designing such attacks. Moreover, our diverse collection of perturbed graphs forms a (black-box) unit test offering a first glance at a model's robustness.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 2 weaker matches are hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{mujkanovic2023defenses,
  title  = {Are Defenses for Graph Neural Networks Robust?},
  author = {Felix Mujkanovic and Simon Geisler and Stephan Günnemann and Aleksandar Bojchevski},
  year   = {2023},
  eprint = {2301.13694},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2301.13694v1},
  journal = {NEURIPS 2023 2023}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2301.13694.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2301.13694)

Discussion