Attack and Defense in Cellular Decision-Making: Lessons from Machine Learning

被引:7
|
作者
Rademaker, Thomas J. [1 ]
Bengio, Emmanuel [2 ]
Francois, Paul [1 ]
机构
[1] McGill Univ, Dept Phys, Montreal, PQ H3A 2T8, Canada
[2] McGill Univ, Sch Comp Sci, Montreal, PQ H3A 2A7, Canada
来源
PHYSICAL REVIEW X | 2019年 / 9卷 / 03期
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
T-CELLS; LIGAND DISCRIMINATION; MECHANISM; ANTAGONISM; ACTIVATION; BLOCKADE; MODEL; SELF; TCR;
D O I
10.1103/PhysRevX.9.031012
中图分类号
O4 [物理学];
学科分类号
0702 ;
摘要
Machine-learning algorithms can be fooled by small well-designed adversarial perturbations. This is reminiscent of cellular decision-making where ligands (called antagonists) prevent correct signaling, like in early immune recognition. We draw a formal analogy between neural networks used in machine learning and models of cellular decision-making (adaptive proofreading). We apply attacks from machine learning to simple decision-making models and show explicitly the correspondence to antagonism by weakly bound ligands. Such antagonism is absent in more nonlinear models, which inspires us to implement a biomimetic defense in neural networks filtering out adversarial perturbations. We then apply a gradient-descent approach from machine learning to different cellular decision-making models, and we reveal the existence of two regimes characterized by the presence or absence of a critical point for the gradient. This critical point causes the strongest antagonists to lie close to the decision boundary. This is validated in the loss landscapes of robust neural networks and cellular decision-making models, and observed experimentally for immune cells. For both regimes, we explain how associated defense mechanisms shape the geometry of the loss landscape and why different adversarial attacks are effective in different regimes. Our work connects evolved cellular decision-making to machine learning and motivates the design of a general theory of adversarial perturbations, both for in vivo and in silico systems.
引用
收藏
页数:23
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Machine Learning in Clinical Decision-Making
    Filiberto, Amanda C.
    Leeds, Ira L.
    Loftus, Tyler J.
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN DIGITAL HEALTH, 2021, 3
  • [2] DECISION-MAKING - LESSONS FROM TEHRAN
    PERKINS, AG
    [J]. HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW, 1993, 71 (05) : 12 - 13
  • [3] DECISION-MAKING FOR DEFENSE
    MISER, HJ
    [J]. OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 1965, 13 (05) : 863 - &
  • [4] A Decision-making Method for Swarm Agents in Attack-defense Confrontation
    Wang, Lexing
    Qiu, Tenghai
    Pu, Zhiqiang
    Yi, Jianqiang
    Zhu, Jinying
    Zhao, Yanjie
    [J]. IFAC PAPERSONLINE, 2023, 56 (02): : 7858 - 7864
  • [5] Commentary: Machine learning in clinical decision-making
    Filiberto, Amanda C.
    Donoho, Daniel A.
    Leeds, Ira L.
    Loftus, Tyler J.
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN DIGITAL HEALTH, 2023, 5
  • [6] SOVIET DECISION-MAKING ON DEFENSE
    HOUGH, JF
    [J]. BULLETIN OF THE ATOMIC SCIENTISTS, 1985, 41 (07) : 84 - 88
  • [7] Machine Learning Based Decision-Making: A Sensemaking Perspective
    Li, Jingqi
    Namvar, Morteza
    Im, Ghiyoung P.
    Akhlaghpour, Saeed
    [J]. AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS, 2024, 28
  • [8] Machine learning with asymmetric abstention for biomedical decision-making
    Gandouz, Mariem
    Holzmann, Hajo
    Heider, Dominik
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL INFORMATICS AND DECISION MAKING, 2021, 21 (01)
  • [9] Machine learning with asymmetric abstention for biomedical decision-making
    Mariem Gandouz
    Hajo Holzmann
    Dominik Heider
    [J]. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 21
  • [10] Machine Learning Based Decision-Making: A Sensemaking Perspective
    Li, Jingqi
    Namvar, Morteza
    Im, Ghiyoung P.
    Akhlaghpour, Saeed
    [J]. AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS, 2024, 28