Constrained unsupervised anomaly segmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current unsupervised anomaly localization approaches rely on generative models to learn the distribution of normal images, which is later used to identify potential anomalous regions derived from errors on the reconstructed images. To address the limitations of residual-based anomaly localization, very recent literature has focused on attention maps, by integrating supervision on them in the form of homogenization constraints. In this work, we propose a novel formulation that addresses the problem in a more principled manner, leveraging well-known knowledge in constrained optimization. In particular, the equality constraint on the attention maps in prior work is replaced by an inequality constraint, which allows more flexibility. In addition, to address the limitations of penalty-based functions we employ an extension of the popular log-barrier methods to handle the constraint. Last, we propose an alternative regularization term that maximizes the Shannon entropy of the attention maps, reducing the amount of hyperparameters of the proposed model. Comprehensive experiments on two publicly available datasets on brain lesion segmentation demonstrate that the proposed approach substantially outperforms relevant literature, establishing new state-of-the-art results for unsupervised lesion segmentation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".