Is Deep Learning Safe for Robot Vision? Adversarial Examples against the iCub Humanoid

Deep neural networks have been widely adopted in recent years, exhibiting impressive performances in several application domains. It has however been shown that they can be fooled by adversarial examples, i.e., images altered by a barely-perceivable adversarial noise, carefully crafted to mislead classification. In this work, we aim to evaluate the extent to which robot-vision systems embodying deep-learning algorithms are vulnerable to adversarial examples, and propose a computationally efficient countermeasure to mitigate this threat, based on rejecting classification of anomalous inputs. We then provide a clearer understanding of the safety properties of deep networks through an intuitive empirical analysis, showing that the mapping learned by such networks essentially violates the smoothness assumption of learning algorithms. We finally discuss the main limitations of this work, including the creation of real-world adversarial examples, and sketch promising research directions.Comment: Accepted for publication at the ICCV 2017 Workshop on Vision in Practice on Autonomous Robots (ViPAR

Speaker verification using sequence discriminant support vector machines

This paper presents a text-independent speaker verification system using support vector machines (SVMs) with score-space kernels. Score-space kernels generalize Fisher kernels and are based on underlying generative models such as Gaussian mixture models (GMMs). This approach provides direct discrimination between whole sequences, in contrast with the frame-level approaches at the heart of most current systems. The resultant SVMs have a very high dimensionality since it is related to the number of parameters in the underlying generative model. To address problems that arise in the resultant optimization we introduce a technique called spherical normalization that preconditions the Hessian matrix. We have performed speaker verification experiments using the PolyVar database. The SVM system presented here reduces the relative error rates by 34% compared to a GMM likelihood ratio system