Abstract: As a research community, we are still lacking a systematic understanding of the progress on adversarial robustness, which often makes it hard to identify the most promising ideas in training robust models. A key challenge in benchmarking robustness is that its evaluation is often error-prone, leading to overestimation of the true robustness of models. While adaptive attacks designed for a particular defense are a potential solution, they have to be highly customized for particular models, which makes it difficult to compare different methods. Our goal is to instead establish a standardized benchmark of adversarial robustness, which as accurately as possible reflects the robustness of the considered models within a reasonable computational budget. To evaluate the robustness of models for our benchmark, we consider AutoAttack, an ensemble of white- and black-box attacks which was recently shown in a large-scale study to improve almost all robustness evaluations compared to the original publications. We also impose some restrictions on the admitted models to rule out defenses that only make gradient-based attacks ineffective without improving actual robustness. Our leaderboard, hosted at this https URL, contains evaluations of 90+ models and aims at reflecting the current state of the art on a set of well-defined tasks in $\ell_\infty$- and $\ell_2$-threat models and on common corruptions, with possible extensions in the future. Additionally, we open-source the library this https URL that provides unified access to 60+ robust models to facilitate their downstream applications. Finally, based on the collected models, we analyze the impact of robustness on the performance on distribution shifts, calibration, out-of-distribution detection, fairness, privacy leakage, smoothness, and transferability.
... read more