Search for: All records

The rise of foundation models fine-tuned on human feedback from potentially untrusted users has increased the risk of adversarial data poisoning, necessitating the study of robustness of learning algorithms against such attacks. Existing research on provable certified robustness against data poisoning attacks primarily focuses on certifying robustness for static adversaries who modify a fraction of the dataset used to train the model before the training algorithm is applied. In practice, particularly when learning from human feedback in an online sense, adversaries can observe and react to the learning process and inject poisoned samples that optimize adversarial objectives better than when they are restricted to poisoning a static dataset once, before the learning algorithm is applied. Indeed, it has been shown in prior work that online dynamic adversaries can be significantly more powerful than static ones. We present a novel framework for computing certified bounds on the impact of dynamic poisoning, and use these certificates to design robust learning algorithms. We give an illustration of the framework for the mean estimation problem and binary classification problems and outline directions for extending this in further work. 

It is well-known that linear quadratic regulators (LQR) enjoy guaranteed stability margins, whereas linear quadratic Gaussian regulators (LQG) do not. In this letter, we consider systems and compensators defined over directed acyclic graphs. In particular, there are multiple decision-makers, each with access to a different part of the global state. In this setting, the optimal LQR compensator is dynamic, similar to classical LQG. We show that when sub-controller input costs are decoupled (but there is possible coupling between sub-controller state costs), the decentralized LQR compensator enjoys similar guaranteed stability margins to classical LQR. However, these guarantees disappear when cost coupling is introduced. 

People have expectations about how colors map to concepts in visualizations, and they are better at interpreting visualizations that match their expectations. Traditionally, studies on these expectations ( inferred mappings ) distinguished distinct factors relevant for visualizations of categorical vs. continuous information. Studies on categorical information focused on direct associations (e.g., mangos are associated with yellows) whereas studies on continuous information focused on relational associations (e.g., darker colors map to larger quantities; dark-is-more bias). We unite these two areas within a single framework of assignment inference. Assignment inference is the process by which people infer mappings between perceptual features and concepts represented in encoding systems. Observers infer globally optimal assignments by maximizing the “merit,” or “goodness,” of each possible assignment. Previous work on assignment inference focused on visualizations of categorical information. We extend this approach to visualizations of continuous data by (a) broadening the notion of merit to include relational associations and (b) developing a method for combining multiple (sometimes conflicting) sources of merit to predict people's inferred mappings. We developed and tested our model on data from experiments in which participants interpreted colormap data visualizations, representing fictitious data about environmental concepts (sunshine, shade, wild fire, ocean water, glacial ice). We found both direct and relational associations contribute independently to inferred mappings. These results can be used to optimize visualization design to facilitate visual communication.