Reliable Abstention under Adversarial Injections: Tight Lower Bounds and New Upper Bounds
Abstract
Domain fit: Niche / domain-specific · No strong AI-core implementation/artifact signals were detected from current providers.
We study online learning in the adversarial injection model introduced by [Goel et al. 2017], where a stream of labeled examples is predominantly drawn i.i.d.\ from an unknown distribution $\mathcal{D}$, but may be interspersed with adversarially chosen instances without the learner knowing which rounds are adversarial. Crucially, labels are always consistent with a fixed target concept (the clean-label setting). The learner is additionally allowed to abstain from predicting, and the total error counts the mistakes whenever the learner decides to predict and incorrect abstentions when it abstains on i.i.d.\ rounds. Perhaps surprisingly, prior work shows that oracle access to the underlying distribution yields $O(d^2 \log T)$ combined error for VC dimension $d$, while distribution-agnostic algorithms achieve only $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{T})$ for restricted classes, leaving open whether this gap is fundamental. We resolve this question by proving a matching $Ω(\sqrt{T})$ lower bound for VC dimension $1$, establishing a sharp separation between the two information regimes. On the algorithmic side, we introduce a potential-based framework driven by \emph{robust witnesses}, small subsets of labeled examples that certify predictions while remaining resilient to adversarial contamination. We instantiate this framework using two combinatorial dimensions: (1) \emph{inference dimension}, yielding combined error $\tilde{O}(T^{1-1/k})$ for classes of inference dimension $k$, and (2) \emph{certificate dimension}, a new relaxation we introduce. As an application, we show that halfspaces in $\mathbb{R}^2$ have certificate dimension $3$, obtaining the first distribution-agnostic bound of $\tilde{O}(T^{2/3})$ for this class. This is notable since [Blum et al. 2021] showed halfspaces are not robustly learnable under clean-label attacks without abstention.
Results and benchmarks
We study online learning in the adversarial injection model introduced by [Goel et al.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 55/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- This is primarily a method paper. Reproduce it within a maintained framework baseline instead of chasing paper-specific repos.
- Start with framework-native implementations (e.g. PyTorch optimizer module, Optax, or Transformers training loops).
- Replicate the paper ablation settings first, then compare against modern baselines.
Time to first repro: a few hours
This is primarily a method paper. Reproduce it within a maintained framework baseline instead of chasing paper-specific repos.
- No maintained paper-verified implementation is currently available
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Validation caveat
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Datasets
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
None detected
Methods
QUBO / Combinatorial optimization
Domains
None detected
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.