Provably Invincible Adversarial Attacks on Reinforcement Learning Systems: A Rate-Distortion Information-Theoretic Approach

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.13792
• Title: Provably Invincible Adversarial Attacks on Reinforcement Learning Systems: A Rate-Distortion Information-Theoretic Approach
• Authors: Ziqing Lu (University of Iowa), Lifeng Lai (University of California, Davis), Weiyu Xu (University of Iowa)
• Classification: cs.LG cs.AI
• Publication Date: October 15, 2025 (arXiv preprint)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.13792

Abstract

The widespread deployment of reinforcement learning in safety-critical applications makes the study of adversarial attacks crucial. Previous work primarily considers deterministic adversarial attack strategies, which victim agents can defend against by reversing the deterministic attacks. This paper proposes a provably "invincible" adversarial attack method, where the attacker applies rate-distortion information-theoretic methods to randomly alter the agent's observations of the transition kernel, ensuring that the agent acquires zero or minimal information about the true kernel during training. The paper derives information-theoretic lower bounds on the victim agent's reward regret and demonstrates the impact of rate-distortion attacks on state-of-the-art model-based and model-free algorithms.

Research Background and Motivation

Problem Definition

1. Core Problem: Existing adversarial attacks on reinforcement learning primarily employ deterministic strategies, which can be defended against by victim agents through learning and reversing the attack patterns, lacking theoretical guarantees of "irreversibility."
2. Significance: Reinforcement learning is widely applied in safety-critical domains such as autonomous driving, financial decision-making, and unmanned aerial vehicle/robot algorithms. Studying worst-case adversarial attacks is crucial for assessing and enhancing the robustness of RL systems.
3. Limitations of Existing Methods:
   • Deterministic attacks assume the victim is unaware of the attack's existence
   • If the victim detects the attack, it may discover the mapping between false and true transition kernels
   • Cannot guarantee attack effectiveness; lacks theoretical proof of "invincibility"
4. Research Motivation: Design an adversarial attack method that cannot be effectively defended against even if the victim knows the attack strategy, with theoretical guarantees from an information-theoretic perspective.

Core Contributions

1. Proposes Rate-Distortion Information-Theoretic Adversarial Attacks: First application of rate-distortion theory to RL adversarial attacks, minimizing mutual information through randomized transition kernel observations.
2. Theoretical Lower Bound Proof: Derives information-theoretic lower bounds on victim agent reward regret, proving the "invincibility" of the attack.
3. Theoretical Analysis of Stochastic Kernel MDPs: Analyzes the existence of optimal policies in MDPs with uncertain transition kernels, revealing that optimal policies in the traditional sense may not exist.
4. Novel Policy Iteration Algorithm: Proposes a new policy iteration algorithm for stochastic kernel MDPs and proves it does not always converge to optimal solutions.
5. Comprehensive Experimental Validation: Verifies attack effectiveness across multiple settings including planning, tabular Q-learning, and deep Q-learning.

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Consider a five-tuple MDP: (S, A, X, r, γ), where:

• S: State space, |S| = S
• A: Action space, |A| = A
• X: Stochastic transition kernel, sampled from prior distribution p
• r: Reward function r: S × A × S → 0,1
• γ ∈ 0,1: Discount factor

Attack Setting: The attacker designs a likelihood function P(Y|X) to randomly map the true transition kernel X to false observation kernel Y.

Model Architecture

1. Rate-Distortion Attack Framework

The attacker's optimization objective:

min_{p(X,Y)} I(X;Y)                    (1)
s.t. E_{p(X,Y)}C(X → Y) ≤ B          (2)

where I(X;Y) is mutual information and B is the attack budget.

2. Victim Policy Optimization

Given false observation Y_i, the victim's optimal policy:

π*(·|Y_i) = argmin_π E_{P(X|Y_i)}||V_X^π - V_X^{π*(X)}||_∞

3. Regret Definition

Total regret is defined as:

R = E_{p(X,Y)}||V^{π*(X)} - V^{π*(·|Y)}||_∞

Technical Innovations

1. Randomization Strategy

• Unlike deterministic attacks, employs probabilistic distribution P(Y|X) for random mapping
• Even if the victim knows the attack strategy, it cannot determine the specific true transition kernel

2. Information-Theoretic Guarantees

• Ensures minimal information acquisition by the victim through minimizing mutual information I(X;Y)
• Establishes connection between regret lower bounds and decoding error probability using Fano's inequality

3. Implementation Methods

• Hyperparameter Modification: Altering hyperparameters of training environment dynamics
• Direct Replacement: Constructing false kernels to directly replace true kernels
• State Observation Attack: Implemented through random state permutation, requiring minimal assumptions

Experimental Setup

Datasets and Environments

1. Block World: 12-state grid world with 4 actions (east, west, south, north)
2. CartPole: Continuous state space with 2 actions (left, right movement)
3. 3-State MDP: Simple environment for theoretical analysis

Evaluation Metrics

• Regret: R = E_{p(X,Y)}||V^{π*(X)} - V^{π*(·|Y)}||_∞
• Mutual Information: I(X;Y)
• Relative Performance Loss: Regret as percentage of optimal V value

Baseline Methods

• Deterministic attacks
• No-attack baseline
• Optimal attacks under budget constraints

Implementation Details

• Block World: Attack implemented via "slip probability" α (α=0.8 or 0.2)
• CartPole: Attack implemented via state observation noise δ
• Uniform prior distribution p(X_i) = 1/2

Experimental Results

Main Results

1. Theoretical Lower Bound Verification

Theorem 3.1: In MDPs satisfying the conditions, regret satisfies:

R ≥ εP_e
H(P_e) + P_e log|Ω(X)| ≥ H(X|Y) = H(X) - I(X;Y)

where P_e is the error probability of the optimal decoder and ε > 0 is the lower bound of policy difference.

2. Planning Attack Effects

• In 3-state MDP, attacks with I(X;Y) = 0 result in 44.3% performance loss
• Regret value R = 3.84, accounting for 44.3% of optimal V value

3. Model-Free Learning Attacks

• Block World: Randomized attacks cause greater loss than deterministic attacks
• CartPole: DQN training regret increases with training iterations
• State Permutation Attack: Effective attack achieved through simple random state permutation

Ablation Studies

1. Budget Constraint Analysis

• As attack budget B increases from 0 to 0.711, regret monotonically increases
• When B reaches 0.711, regret reaches maximum of 44.3%

2. Minimum Mutual Information Attack

• Direct optimization of mutual information minimization: min I(X;Y)
• Achieves maximum regret of 44.3% at budget B=0.7285

Key Findings

1. Non-Existence of Optimal Policies

Theorem 4.1: For stochastic kernel MDPs, optimal policy π* satisfying the following does not always exist:

π* = argmax_π E_X V_X^π(s), ∀s ∈ S

2. Policy Iteration Non-Convergence

Theorem 5.1: Even when optimal policies exist, extended policy iteration algorithms do not always converge to optimal solutions.

Related Work

1. Research on Transition Kernel Uncertainty

• Distributionally Robust MDPs: Optimize worst-case performance over uncertainty sets of transition kernels
• Bayesian Adaptive MDPs: Assume prior distributions over transition kernel parameters, learning through Bayesian updates

2. Transition Kernel Poisoning Attacks

• Environment Hyperparameter Attacks: Modify environment dynamics by changing hyperparameters
• Offline Poisoning Attacks: Construct optimal false transition kernels
• Information-Theoretic Covert Attacks: Use KL divergence constraints on attack detectability

Innovations of This Work

• First to employ stochastic transition kernel attacks under Bayesian settings
• Minimize mutual information through rate-distortion theory rather than constraining detectability
• Provide theoretical guarantees on attack effectiveness

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Theoretical Guarantees: The proposed rate-distortion attack possesses provable "invincibility," remaining effective even if the victim knows the attack strategy.
2. Broad Applicability: The attack method applies to both model-based and model-free reinforcement learning algorithms.
3. Simple Implementation: Random state observation attacks can be simply implemented with minimal requirements on the attacker.

Limitations

1. Absence of Optimal Policies: Traditional optimal policies may not exist in stochastic kernel MDPs, requiring new policy definitions.
2. Algorithm Convergence: The proposed policy iteration algorithm does not guarantee convergence to optimal solutions.
3. Practical Deployment: The feasibility and detectability of implementing attacks in real environments require further investigation.

Future Directions

1. Develop effective policies for cases where traditional optimal policies do not exist
2. Design planning/learning algorithms with convergence guarantees
3. Study defense mechanisms and attack detection methods
4. Extend to continuous state spaces and more complex environments

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Innovation: First application of rate-distortion theory to RL adversarial attacks, providing a rigorous theoretical analysis framework.
2. Problem Importance: Addresses the fundamental problem that existing deterministic attacks can be reversed, with significant security implications.
3. Theoretical Rigor: Provides mathematical proofs of attack effectiveness using information-theoretic tools, including regret lower bounds and Fano inequality applications.
4. Comprehensive Experiments: Covers multiple settings including planning, tabular learning, and deep learning, validating broad applicability.

Weaknesses

1. Practical Feasibility: The paper assumes the attacker can completely control the victim's environment observations, which may be difficult to achieve in real deployment.
2. Insufficient Defense Research: While claiming "invincibility," discussion of possible defense strategies is limited, such as anomaly detection and multi-source verification.
3. Computational Complexity: Insufficient analysis of computational complexity for finding optimal attack parameters in large-scale state spaces.
4. Ethical Considerations: As an attack method, lacks discussion of potential misuse and safeguarding measures.

Impact

1. Academic Contribution: Provides new theoretical frameworks and analytical tools for RL security research.
2. Practical Value: Helps assess worst-case performance of RL systems, guiding robust design.
3. Reproducibility: Provides detailed algorithm descriptions and experimental settings for easy reproduction and extension.

Applicable Scenarios

1. Security Assessment: Evaluate robustness of RL systems in critical applications
2. Algorithm Design: Guide development of attack-resistant RL algorithms
3. Theoretical Research: Provide new perspectives for RL theory under uncertainty
4. Defense Mechanisms: Serve as red-team testing tool for evaluating defense effectiveness

References

The paper cites important works from multiple domains including reinforcement learning, information theory, and adversarial attacks:

• Classical RL textbooks (Sutton & Barto, 2018)
• Information theory foundations (Cover & Thomas, 2006)
• Distributionally robust MDP related work (Iyengar, 2005; Nilim & El Ghaoui, 2003)
• Recent RL adversarial attack research (Zhang et al., 2020; Liu & Lai, 2021)

Overall Assessment: This is an important theoretical contribution to the RL security domain, providing new perspectives and rigorous theoretical guarantees for adversarial attacks through rate-distortion theory. While practical deployment feasibility and defense mechanisms require further refinement, its theoretical framework and analytical methods establish a solid foundation for future research in this field.