MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184338320 · doi:10.1109/tnsm.2021.3098784

TSAGen: Synthetic Time Series Generation for KPI Anomaly Detection

2021· article· en· W3184338320 on OpenAlexaff
Chengyu Wang, Kui Wu, Tongqing Zhou, Guang Yu, Zhiping Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAnomaly detectionComputer scienceData miningPerformance indicatorTime seriesAnomaly (physics)Series (stratigraphy)Overhead (engineering)Machine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A key performance indicator (KPI) consists of critical time series data that reflect the runtime states of network systems (e.g., response time and available bandwidth). Despite the importance of KPI, datasets for KPI anomaly detection available to the public are very limited, due to privacy concerns and the high overhead in manually labelling the data. The insufficiency of public KPI data poses a great barrier for network researchers and practitioners to evaluate and test what-if scenarios in the development of artificial intelligence for IT operations (AIOps) and anomaly detection algorithms. To tackle the difficulty, we develop a univariate time series generation tool called TSAGen, which can generate KPI data with anomalies and controllable characteristics for KPI anomaly detection. Experiment results show that the data generated by TSAGen can be used for comprehensive evaluation of anomaly detection algorithms with diverse user-defined what-if scenarios.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations38
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service ManagementSame topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207