Fluently Lying: Adversarial Robustness Can Be Substrate-Dependent

Daye Kang, Hyeongboo Baek
4/1/2026
cs.CV

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

The primary tools used to monitor and defend object detectors under adversarial attack assume that when accuracy degrades, detection count drops in tandem. This coupling was assumed, not measured. We report a counterexample observed on a single model: under standard PGD, EMS-YOLO, a spiking neural network (SNN) object detector, retains more than 70% of its detections while mAP collapses from 0.528 to 0.042. We term this count-preserving accuracy collapse Quality Corruption (QC), to distinguish it from the suppression that dominates untargeted evaluation. Across four SNN architectures and two threat models (l-infinity and l-2), QC appears only in one of the four detectors tested (EMS-YOLO). On this model, all five standard defense components fail to detect or mitigate QC, suggesting the defense ecosystem may rely on a shared assumption calibrated on a single substrate. These results provide, to our knowledge, the first evidence that adversarial failure modes can be substrate-dependent.

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. Any repos shown below are weak matches — 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{kang2026fluently,
  title  = {Fluently Lying: Adversarial Robustness Can Be Substrate-Dependent},
  author = {Daye Kang and Hyeongboo Baek},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2604.00605},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.00605v1}
}

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/2604.00605.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2604.00605)

Discussion