Xinlei He

CR
h-index22
6papers
349citations
Novelty54%
AI Score38

6 Papers

17.7AIAug 21, 2024Code
Automatic Dataset Construction (ADC): Sample Collection, Data Curation, and Beyond

Minghao Liu, Zonglin Di, Jiaheng Wei et al.

Large-scale data collection is essential for developing personalized training data, mitigating the shortage of training data, and fine-tuning specialized models. However, creating high-quality datasets quickly and accurately remains a challenge due to annotation errors, the substantial time and costs associated with human labor. To address these issues, we propose Automatic Dataset Construction (ADC), an innovative methodology that automates dataset creation with negligible cost and high efficiency. Taking the image classification task as a starting point, ADC leverages LLMs for the detailed class design and code generation to collect relevant samples via search engines, significantly reducing the need for manual annotation and speeding up the data generation process. Despite these advantages, ADC also encounters real-world challenges such as label errors (label noise) and imbalanced data distributions (label bias). We provide open-source software that incorporates existing methods for label error detection, robust learning under noisy and biased data, ensuring a higher-quality training data and more robust model training procedure. Furthermore, we design three benchmark datasets focused on label noise detection, label noise learning, and class-imbalanced learning. These datasets are vital because there are few existing datasets specifically for label noise detection, despite its importance. Finally, we evaluate the performance of existing popular methods on these datasets, thereby facilitating further research in the field.

7.1CROct 16, 2023
A Comprehensive Study of Privacy Risks in Curriculum Learning

Joann Qiongna Chen, Xinlei He, Zheng Li et al.

Training a machine learning model with data following a meaningful order, i.e., from easy to hard, has been proven to be effective in accelerating the training process and achieving better model performance. The key enabling technique is curriculum learning (CL), which has seen great success and has been deployed in areas like image and text classification. Yet, how CL affects the privacy of machine learning is unclear. Given that CL changes the way a model memorizes the training data, its influence on data privacy needs to be thoroughly evaluated. To fill this knowledge gap, we perform the first study and leverage membership inference attack (MIA) and attribute inference attack (AIA) as two vectors to quantify the privacy leakage caused by CL. Our evaluation of nine real-world datasets with attack methods (NN-based, metric-based, label-only MIA, and NN-based AIA) revealed new insights about CL. First, MIA becomes slightly more effective when CL is applied, but the impact is much more prominent to a subset of training samples ranked as difficult. Second, a model trained under CL is less vulnerable under AIA, compared to MIA. Third, the existing defense techniques like DP-SGD, MemGuard, and MixupMMD are still effective under CL, though DP-SGD has a significant impact on target model accuracy. Finally, based on our insights into CL, we propose a new MIA, termed Diff-Cali, which exploits the difficulty scores for result calibration and is demonstrated to be effective against all CL methods and the normal training method. With this study, we hope to draw the community's attention to the unintended privacy risks of emerging machine-learning techniques and develop new attack benchmarks and defense solutions.

4.2CRMay 9, 2024Code
Link Stealing Attacks Against Inductive Graph Neural Networks

Yixin Wu, Xinlei He, Pascal Berrang et al.

A graph neural network (GNN) is a type of neural network that is specifically designed to process graph-structured data. Typically, GNNs can be implemented in two settings, including the transductive setting and the inductive setting. In the transductive setting, the trained model can only predict the labels of nodes that were observed at the training time. In the inductive setting, the trained model can be generalized to new nodes/graphs. Due to its flexibility, the inductive setting is the most popular GNN setting at the moment. Previous work has shown that transductive GNNs are vulnerable to a series of privacy attacks. However, a comprehensive privacy analysis of inductive GNN models is still missing. This paper fills the gap by conducting a systematic privacy analysis of inductive GNNs through the lens of link stealing attacks, one of the most popular attacks that are specifically designed for GNNs. We propose two types of link stealing attacks, i.e., posterior-only attacks and combined attacks. We define threat models of the posterior-only attacks with respect to node topology and the combined attacks by considering combinations of posteriors, node attributes, and graph features. Extensive evaluation on six real-world datasets demonstrates that inductive GNNs leak rich information that enables link stealing attacks with advantageous properties. Even attacks with no knowledge about graph structures can be effective. We also show that our attacks are robust to different node similarities and different graph features. As a counterpart, we investigate two possible defenses and discover they are ineffective against our attacks, which calls for more effective defenses.

32.3CRDec 15, 2021Code
Model Stealing Attacks Against Inductive Graph Neural Networks

Yun Shen, Xinlei He, Yufei Han et al.

Many real-world data come in the form of graphs. Graph neural networks (GNNs), a new family of machine learning (ML) models, have been proposed to fully leverage graph data to build powerful applications. In particular, the inductive GNNs, which can generalize to unseen data, become mainstream in this direction. Machine learning models have shown great potential in various tasks and have been deployed in many real-world scenarios. To train a good model, a large amount of data as well as computational resources are needed, leading to valuable intellectual property. Previous research has shown that ML models are prone to model stealing attacks, which aim to steal the functionality of the target models. However, most of them focus on the models trained with images and texts. On the other hand, little attention has been paid to models trained with graph data, i.e., GNNs. In this paper, we fill the gap by proposing the first model stealing attacks against inductive GNNs. We systematically define the threat model and propose six attacks based on the adversary's background knowledge and the responses of the target models. Our evaluation on six benchmark datasets shows that the proposed model stealing attacks against GNNs achieve promising performance.

23.0LGFeb 8, 2021Code
Quantifying and Mitigating Privacy Risks of Contrastive Learning

Xinlei He, Yang Zhang

Data is the key factor to drive the development of machine learning (ML) during the past decade. However, high-quality data, in particular labeled data, is often hard and expensive to collect. To leverage large-scale unlabeled data, self-supervised learning, represented by contrastive learning, is introduced. The objective of contrastive learning is to map different views derived from a training sample (e.g., through data augmentation) closer in their representation space, while different views derived from different samples more distant. In this way, a contrastive model learns to generate informative representations for data samples, which are then used to perform downstream ML tasks. Recent research has shown that machine learning models are vulnerable to various privacy attacks. However, most of the current efforts concentrate on models trained with supervised learning. Meanwhile, data samples' informative representations learned with contrastive learning may cause severe privacy risks as well. In this paper, we perform the first privacy analysis of contrastive learning through the lens of membership inference and attribute inference. Our experimental results show that contrastive models trained on image datasets are less vulnerable to membership inference attacks but more vulnerable to attribute inference attacks compared to supervised models. The former is due to the fact that contrastive models are less prone to overfitting, while the latter is caused by contrastive models' capability of representing data samples expressively. To remedy this situation, we propose the first privacy-preserving contrastive learning mechanism, Talos, relying on adversarial training. Empirical results show that Talos can successfully mitigate attribute inference risks for contrastive models while maintaining their membership privacy and model utility.

38.0CRFeb 4, 2021Code
ML-Doctor: Holistic Risk Assessment of Inference Attacks Against Machine Learning Models

Yugeng Liu, Rui Wen, Xinlei He et al.

Inference attacks against Machine Learning (ML) models allow adversaries to learn sensitive information about training data, model parameters, etc. While researchers have studied, in depth, several kinds of attacks, they have done so in isolation. As a result, we lack a comprehensive picture of the risks caused by the attacks, e.g., the different scenarios they can be applied to, the common factors that influence their performance, the relationship among them, or the effectiveness of possible defenses. In this paper, we fill this gap by presenting a first-of-its-kind holistic risk assessment of different inference attacks against machine learning models. We concentrate on four attacks -- namely, membership inference, model inversion, attribute inference, and model stealing -- and establish a threat model taxonomy. Our extensive experimental evaluation, run on five model architectures and four image datasets, shows that the complexity of the training dataset plays an important role with respect to the attack's performance, while the effectiveness of model stealing and membership inference attacks are negatively correlated. We also show that defenses like DP-SGD and Knowledge Distillation can only mitigate some of the inference attacks. Our analysis relies on a modular re-usable software, ML-Doctor, which enables ML model owners to assess the risks of deploying their models, and equally serves as a benchmark tool for researchers and practitioners.