4.6 Article

Universal adversarial perturbations for CNN classifiers in EEG-based BCIs

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEURAL ENGINEERING
卷 18, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1741-2552/ac0f4c

关键词

brain-computer interface; convolutional neural network; electroencephalogram; universal adversarial perturbation

资金

  1. Technology Innovation Project of Hubei Province of China [2019AEA171]
  2. Zhejiang Lab [2021KE0AB04]
  3. Hubei Province Funds for Distinguished Young Scholars [2020CFA050]
  4. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61873321, U1913207]
  5. National Social Science Foundation of China [19ZDA104, 20AZD089]
  6. International Science and Technology Cooperation Program of China [2017YFE0128300]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study introduces a novel total loss minimization approach to generate universal adversarial perturbations for EEG-based BCIs. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of this method on three popular CNN classifiers for both target and non-target attacks, while also confirming the transferability of UAPs across different systems.
Objective. Multiple convolutional neural network (CNN) classifiers have been proposed for electroencephalogram (EEG) based brain-computer interfaces (BCIs). However, CNN models have been found vulnerable to universal adversarial perturbations (UAPs), which are small and example-independent, yet powerful enough to degrade the performance of a CNN model, when added to a benign example. Approach. This paper proposes a novel total loss minimization (TLM) approach to generate UAPs for EEG-based BCIs. Main results. Experimental results demonstrated the effectiveness of TLM on three popular CNN classifiers for both target and non-target attacks. We also verified the transferability of UAPs in EEG-based BCI systems. Significance. To our knowledge, this is the first study on UAPs of CNN classifiers in EEG-based BCIs. UAPs are easy to construct, and can attack BCIs in real-time, exposing a potentially critical security concern of BCIs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据