  Adversarial attack perturbs an image with an imperceptible noise, leading to
incorrect model prediction. Recently, a few works showed inherent bias
associated with such attack (robustness bias), where certain subgroups in a
dataset (e.g. based on class, gender, etc.) are less robust than others. This
bias not only persists even after adversarial training, but often results in
severe performance discrepancies across these subgroups. Existing works
characterize the subgroup's robustness bias by only checking individual
sample's proximity to the decision boundary. In this work, we argue that this
measure alone is not sufficient and validate our argument via extensive
experimental analysis. It has been observed that adversarial attacks often
corrupt the high-frequency components of the input image. We, therefore,
propose a holistic approach for quantifying adversarial vulnerability of a
sample by combining these different perspectives, i.e., degree of model's
reliance on high-frequency features and the (conventional) sample-distance to
the decision boundary. We demonstrate that by reliably estimating adversarial
vulnerability at the sample level using the proposed holistic metric, it is
possible to develop a trustworthy system where humans can be alerted about the
incoming samples that are highly likely to be misclassified at test time. This
is achieved with better precision when our holistic metric is used over
individual measures. To further corroborate the utility of the proposed
holistic approach, we perform knowledge distillation in a limited-sample
setting. We observe that the student network trained with the subset of samples
selected using our combined metric performs better than both the competing
baselines, viz., where samples are selected randomly or based on their
distances to the decision boundary.
