Adversarial attacks in Natural Language Processing (NLP) present a critical challenge, particularly in sentiment analysis, where subtle input modifications can significantly alter model predictions. In search of more robust defenses against adversarial attacks on sentimental analysis, this research work introduces two novel defense mechanisms: the Lexicon-Based Random Substitute Model (LRSM) and the Word-Variant Voting Model (WVVM). LRSM employs randomized substitutions from a dataset-specific lexicon to generate diverse input variations, disrupting adversarial strategies by introducing unpredictability. Unlike traditional defenses requiring synonym dictionaries or precomputed semantic relationships, LRSM directly substitutes words with random lexicon alternatives, reducing overhead while maintaining robustness. Notably, LRSM not only neutralizes adversarial perturbations but occasionally surpasses the original accuracy by correcting inherent model misclassifications. Building on LRSM, WVVM integrates LRSM, Frequency-Guided Word Substitution (FGWS), and Synonym Random Substitution and Voting (RS&V) in an ensemble framework that adaptively combines their outputs. Logistic Regression (LR) emerged as the optimal ensemble configuration, leveraging its regularization parameters to balance the contributions of individual defenses. WVVM consistently outperformed standalone defenses, demonstrating superior restored accuracy and F1 scores across adversarial scenarios. The proposed defenses were evaluated on two well-known sentiment analysis benchmarks: the IMDB Sentiment Dataset and the Yelp Polarity Dataset. The IMDB dataset, comprising 50,000 labeled movie reviews, and the Yelp Polarity dataset, containing labeled business reviews, provided diverse linguistic challenges for assessing adversarial robustness. Both datasets were tested using 4000 adversarial examples generated by established attacks, including Probability Weighted Word Saliency, TextFooler, and BERT-based Adversarial Examples. WVVM and LRSM demonstrated superior performance in restoring accuracy and F1 scores across both datasets, with WVVM excelling through its ensemble learning framework. LRSM improved restored accuracy from 75.66% to 83.7% when compared to the second-best individual model, RS&V, while the Support Vector Classifier WVVM variation further improved restored accuracy to 93.17%. Logistic Regression WVVM achieved an F1 score of 86.26% compared to 76.80% for RS&V. These findings establish LRSM and WVVM as robust frameworks for defending against adversarial text attacks in sentiment analysis.
Lel et al. (Sat,) studied this question.