SELF-SUPERVISED ACOUSTIC ANOMALY DETECTION VIA CONTRASTIVE LEARNING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose an acoustic anomaly detection algorithm based on the framework of contrastive learning. Contrastive learning is a recently proposed self-supervised approach that has shown promising results in image classification and speech recognition. However, its application in anomaly detection is underexplored. Earlier studies have demonstrated that it can achieve state-of-the-art performance in image anomaly detection, but its capability in anomalous sound detection is yet to be investigated. For the first time, we propose a contrastive learning-based framework that is suitable for acoustic anomaly detection. Since most existing contrastive learning approaches are targeted toward images, the effect of other data transformations on the performance of the algorithm is unknown. Our framework learns a representation from unlabeled data by applying audio-specific data augmentations. We show that in the resulting latent space, normal and abnormal points are distinguishable. Experiments conducted on the MIMII dataset confirm that our approach can outperform competing methods in detecting anomalies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".