Hardware-Aware Model Inversion in Memristive Spiking Neural Networks
Organizations: University of Groningen Groningen, The Netherlands · Technical University of Munich Munich, Germany
Abstract
Hardware-accelerated spiking neural networks (SNNs) implemented on memristive crossbar arrays offer significant gains in energy efficiency, while device variability and analog noise are sometimes assumed to hinder information extraction. However, whether these hardware effects improve, preserve, or degrade privacy after deployment remains largely unexplored. Therefore, we ask whether model-inversion leakage characterized on an SNN remains representative after the same model is mapped to a non-ideal memristive substrate, and how hardware non-idealities and reliability faults affecting synapses, neuron thresholds, and spike processing reshape that leakage. To study this problem, we introduce Spiking Domain Model Inversion (SDMI), an inversion method that combines Expectation over Transformation (EOT) with surrogate gradients to optimize inputs through stochastic analog behavior and non-differentiable spiking dynamics. We use SDMI consistently across the SNN model, its memristive SNN, and the same memristive SNN under additional hardware perturbations. Across four datasets, reconstruction leakage does not vary monotonically with model accuracy or hardware variability. At comparable accuracy levels, neuron-threshold perturbations increase reconstruction fidelity, measured by SSIM, by up to 51.8%, whereas spike-level perturbations primarily degrade utility without consistently improving reconstruction. Weight noise, in contrast, reduces leakage under the same inversion procedure. These results show that hardware variability is not inherently privacy-preserving: model inversion leakage in memristive SNNs depends on the hardware state and cannot be inferred from model accuracy alone.
Figures & tables
| Prior Work | Target System | Privacy Analysis | Reliability | Temporal SNN | Hardware | Privacy and HW |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANN MI/MIA ( Fredrikson et al., 2015 ; Shokri et al., 2017 ) | ANN | Yes | No | No | No | No |
| Non-ideality-aware ML ( Lammie et al., 2025 ; Joksas et al., 2025 ) | ANN | No | Yes | No | Yes | No |
| DNN fault injection ( He et al., 2020 ; Hong et al., 2019 ) | ANN/DNN | No | Yes | No | Yes | No |
| FIA/SCA on CIM ( Sapui and Tahoori, 2024 ; Wang et al., 2024a ) | ANN/CIM | No | Yes | No | Yes | No |
| SNN security ( Abad et al., 2023 ; Yadav et al., 2024 ) | SNN | No | No | Yes | No | No |
| SNN privacy ( Moshruba et al., 2025 ; Poursiami et al., 2025 ) | SNN | Yes | No | Yes | No | No |
| Component | Configuration |
|---|---|
| Network | Compact feedforward CSNN with convolutional layers and a linear readout |
| Neuron Model | Leaky Integrate-and-Fire (LIF), time-stepped inference with for MNIST |
| Weight Mapping | Differential ReRAM conductance pairs, – |
| Device | Analog resistive memory with , C2C noise , and drift |
| Interface | 8-bit ADC/DAC |
| Input Encoding | Poisson rate encoding for static inputs |
| Level | Type | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| Synaptic | Drift | Gradual weight change |
| Synaptic | Bit flip | Discrete weight error |
| Synaptic | Weight noise | Induced error in weights |
| Neuron | Threshold offset | Static threshold shift |
| Neuron | Threshold noise | Stochastic threshold shift |
| Spike | Deletion | Missing spike events |
| Level | Condition | Acc. (%) | Acc. (pp) | SSIM | SSIM (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| System | Memristive | 95.9 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Synaptic | Drift | 95.6 | -0.3 | +7.0 | |
| Synaptic | Bit error | 73.0 | -22.9 | +23.8 | |
| Synaptic | Weight noise | 78.9 | -17.0 | -35.7 | |
| Neuron | Threshold shift | 70.2 | -25.7 | +51.8 | |
| Neuron | Threshold noise | 81.5 | -14.4 | +34.5 |
| Configuration | SSIM | PSNR (dB) | Confidence | Time (s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full SDMI | 456.26 | |||
| No EOT ( ) | 38.90 | |||
| No TV | 455.17 | |||
| No Sparsity | 455.90 |
| SSIM | Confidence | Time (s) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 39.05 | ||
| 4 | 152.27 | ||
| 8 | 304.53 | ||
| 12 | 455.15 | ||
| 20 | 758.36 |
Appendix figures & tables6 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Item | Setting |
|---|---|
| Datasets | MNIST, Fashion-MNIST, AT&T Faces, DVS128 Gesture |
| Encoding | Poisson (static), event-based (DVS) |
| Temporal window | (static), (DVS) |
| Training | Surrogate-gradient learning |
| Evaluation | Software, memristive, and reliability-fault conditions |
| Perturbations | Synaptic, neuron, and spike levels |
| Dataset | Configuration |
|---|---|
| MNIST | 10 classes; Poisson; . Conv(1,16, )–LIF–AvgPool; Conv(16,32, )–LIF–AvgPool; FC(10). |
| Fashion-MNIST | 10 classes; Poisson; . Conv(1,16, )–LIF–AvgPool; Conv(16,32, )–LIF–AvgPool; FC(10). |
| AT&T Faces | 40 classes; Poisson; . Conv(1,32, )–LIF–AvgPool; Conv(32,64, )–LIF–AvgPool; Conv(64,128, )–LIF–AvgPool; FC(40). |
| DVS128 Gesture | 11 classes; event-based; . Conv(2,32, )–LIF–AvgPool; Conv(32,64, )–LIF–AvgPool; FC(11). |
| Category | Parameter and Value |
|---|---|
| SNN (LIF) | LIF parameters: dataset/layer-specific |
| Reset potential ( ): 0.0 | |
| Time steps ( ): dataset-specific ( ) | |
| IBM AIHWKIT | Device: ReRAM |
| Conductance range ( ): | |
| D2D variability ( ): 0.1 |
| Parameter | Stage 1 | Stage 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Learning rate | 0.01 | 0.003 |
| Start iteration | 0 | 250 |
| Sparsity weight | 0.5 | 8.0 |
| FR excess weight | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| FR weight | 0.5 | 6.0 |
| TV weight | 0.03 | 0.18 |
| Condition | Parameter | Selected value |
|---|---|---|
| Weight drift | Multiplicative deviation | |
| Bit error | Bit position | |
| Weight noise | Std. dev. | |
| Threshold shift | Threshold scale | |
| Threshold noise | Std. dev. | |
| Spike deletion | Probability |
Model Inversion Attacks
Model inversion attacks reconstruct private training data or sensitive attributes from a model’s outputs, parameters, gradients, or representations.
See all 22 papers