MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212441542 · doi:10.1109/tifs.2021.3125608

UN-AVOIDS: Unsupervised and Nonparametric Approach for Visualizing Outliers and Invariant Detection Scoring

2021· article· en· W3212441542 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnomaly detectionVisualizationNonparametric statisticsNovelty detectionOutlierMargin (machine learning)Pattern recognition (psychology)Data visualizationInvariant (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The visualization and detection of anomalies (outliers) are of crucial importance to many fields, particularly cybersecurity. Several approaches have been proposed in these fields, yet to the best of our knowledge, none of them has fulfilled both objectives, simultaneously or cooperatively, in one coherent framework. Moreover, the visualization methods of these approaches were introduced for explaining the output of a detection algorithm, not for data exploration that facilitates a standalone visual detection. This is our point of departure in introducing UN-AVOIDS, an unsupervised and nonparametric approach for both visualization (a human process) and detection (an algorithmic process) of outliers, that assigns invariant anomalous scores (normalized to [0,1]), rather than hard binary-decision. The main aspect of novelty of UN-AVOIDS is that it transforms data into a new space, which is introduced in this paper as neighborhood cumulative density function (NCDF), in which both visualization and detection are carried out. In this space, outliers are remarkably visually distinguishable, and therefore the anomaly scores assigned by the detection algorithm achieved a high area under the ROC curve (AUC). We assessed UN-AVOIDS on both simulated and two recently published cybersecurity datasets, and compared it to three of the most successful anomaly detection methods: LOF, IF, and FABOD. In terms of AUC, UN-AVOIDS was almost an overall winner with a margin that varied between - 0.028 and 0.125, depending on the data. The article concludes by providing a preview of new theoretical and practical avenues for UN-AVOIDS. Among them is designing a visualization aided anomaly detection (VAAD), a type of software that aids analysts by providing UN-AVOIDS’ detection algorithm (running in a back engine), NCDF visualization space (rendered to plots), along with other conventional methods of visualization in the original feature space, all of which are linked in one interactive environment.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and SecuritySame topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207