/.*/Attack(
  (search_method): AlzantotGeneticAlgorithm(
    (pop_size):  60
    (max_iters):  20
    (temp):  0.3
    (give_up_if_no_improvement):  False
    (post_crossover_check):  False
    (max_crossover_retries):  20
  )
  (goal_function):  UntargetedClassification
  (transformation):  WordSwapEmbedding(
    (max_candidates):  8
    (embedding):  WordEmbedding
  )
  (constraints): 
    (0): MaxWordsPerturbed(
        (max_percent):  0.2
        (compare_against_original):  True
      )
    (1): WordEmbeddingDistance(
        (embedding):  WordEmbedding
        (max_mse_dist):  0.5
        (cased):  False
        (include_unknown_words):  True
        (compare_against_original):  True
      )
    (2): LearningToWriteLanguageModel(
        (max_log_prob_diff):  5.0
        (compare_against_original):  True
      )
    (3): RepeatModification
    (4): StopwordModification
  (is_black_box):  True
) 

--------------------------------------------- Result 1 ---------------------------------------------
[92mPositive (90%)[0m --> [91m[FAILED][0m

the performances are immaculate , with roussillon providing comic relief .


--------------------------------------------- Result 2 ---------------------------------------------
[92mPositive (98%)[0m --> [91mNegative (57%)[0m

kinnear . . . gives his [92mbest[0m screen performance with an [92moddly[0m winning [92mportrayal[0m of one of life's [92multimate[0m [92mlosers[0m .

kinnear . . . gives his [91mhigher[0m screen performance with an [91minterestingly[0m winning [91mdescription[0m of one of life's [91mfinal[0m [91mmugs[0m .


--------------------------------------------- Result 3 ---------------------------------------------
[92mPositive (83%)[0m --> [91mNegative (51%)[0m

hugh grant , who has a good line in charm , has never been more [92mcharming[0m than in about a boy .

hugh grant , who has a good line in charm , has never been more [91mloveable[0m than in about a boy .



+-------------------------------+---------+
| Attack Results                |         |
+-------------------------------+---------+
| Number of successful attacks: | 2       |
| Number of failed attacks:     | 1       |
| Number of skipped attacks:    | 0       |
| Original accuracy:            | 100.0%  |
| Accuracy under attack:        | 33.33%  |
| Attack success rate:          | 66.67%  |
| Average perturbed word %:     | 17.34%  |
| Average num. words per input: | 15.0    |
| Avg num queries:              | 1132.67 |
+-------------------------------+---------+
