Detect and Suppress: A Mechanistic Defense against Adversarial Patches in VLA Models
Organizations: Keio University · Waseda University · The University of Tokyo
Abstract
Adversarial patches can disrupt Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models by manipulating visual observations, leading to failures in robot control. However, it remains poorly understood which internal mechanisms underlie these failures and how targeted interventions can mitigate them. In this work, we mechanistically analyze VLA representations using a sparse autoencoder (SAE) and identify a feature whose activation strongly correlates with the presence of an adversarial patch. Based on this analysis, we suppress the identified feature at inference time only when a linear probe detects an attack. This intervention improves robustness without the cost of fine-tuning the VLA. We evaluate our method against VLA adversarial patch attacks on LIBERO-10. Conditional intervention improves success rate under intermittent attacks, whereas continuously applying the same intervention substantially degrades policy performance. These results show that attack-related internal representations can provide useful targets for VLA adversarial defense and that controlling when to intervene is important for limiting disruption to nominal policy behavior.
Figures & tables
| Setting | Recall | FPR | Precision |
|---|---|---|---|
| 81.76 | 0.39 | 92.71 | |
| 84.91 | 0.71 | 96.45 |
| Method | Victim: | Victim: SmolVLA | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | 46.8 | 26.0 | 18.6 | 6.2 |
| Ours | 49.2 | 32.4 | 19.6 | 7.6 |
| w/o Det. | 9.4 | 16.2 | 18.4 | 4.8 |
| w/ Oracle Det. | 52.2 | 29.2 | 22.8 | 7.4 |
| Method | SmolVLA | |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline | 54.4 | 41.4 |
| Ours | 54.6 | 36.6 |
| w/o Det. | 35.2 | 19.0 |
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Method | Victim: | |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline | 30.4 | 4.4 |
| Ours | 46.4 | 33.6 |
| w/o Det. | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| w/ Oracle Det. | 50.0 | 31.8 |
| Training Patch | Test Patch | Recall | FPR | Precision |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UADA | UADA | 81.76 | 0.39 | 92.71 |
| White | 5.74 | 1.47 | 79.59 | |
| Black | 2.17 | 1.47 | 59.56 | |
| Noise | 100.00 | 1.47 | 98.55 | |
| Gripper | Gripper | 84.91 | 0.71 | 96.45 |
| White | 23.11 | 9.45 | 70.97 |
| Method | SmolVLA | |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline | 12.4 | 1.8 |
| Ours | 9.0 | 1.6 |
| w/o Det. | 7.4 | 1.6 |
| w/ Oracle Det. | 7.4 | 1.6 |
Robustness of VLA Models
Robustness of vision-language-action (VLA) models concerns reliable robot behavior under changes to language, vision, sensors, tasks, and hardware.
See all 221 papers