MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783570169 · doi:10.1109/dsaa.2017.55

Identifying Anomalous Nodes in Multidimensional Networks

2017· article· en· W2783570169 on OpenAlexafffund
Amani Chouchane, Mohamed Bouguessa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnomaly detectionComputer scienceProbabilistic logicNode (physics)Anomaly (physics)Set (abstract data type)Dimension (graph theory)Data miningFeature (linguistics)ExploitArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the problem of the detection of anomalies in multidimensional networks, that is, networks where nodes are connected through multiple links (dimensions). Anomaly detection in monodimensional networks has been well studied and several approaches have been proposed. This problem, however, has been less investigated in the multidimensional setting. In this paper we deal with the lack of an effective approach for identifying anomalous nodes in multidimensional networks. Our contribution is two fold. First, we develop a novel scoring function that reflects the anomalousness degree of a node. Second, based on the estimated anomaly scores, we devise a probabilistic approach based on the beta mixture model to systematically discriminate between normal and anomalous nodes. A notable feature of our approach is that it performs anomaly detection in an automatic fashion without requesting human intervention to set an empirical detection threshold to detect anomalies, or by specifying the number of anomalous nodes to be selected. Furthermore, the approach that we propose exploits the topological structure of the multidimensional network as such, without considering any aggregation technique nor examining independently each dimension to identify anomalies. Experiments on synthetic as well as real networks illustrate the suitability of the proposed approach.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.784

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207