MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404742929 · doi:10.1109/tsmc.2024.3496332

Landmark Block-Embedded Aggregation Autoencoder for Anomaly Detection

2024· article· en· W4404742929 on OpenAlexaff
Yuanrong Tian, Yunlong Mi, Jian‐qiang Wang, Witold Pedrycz

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Systems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Hunan ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAutoencoderLandmarkAnomaly detectionBlock (permutation group theory)Artificial intelligenceAnomaly (physics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceMathematicsCombinatoricsDeep learningPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unsupervised anomaly detection (AD) methods based on deep learning have attracted great attention in unlabeled data mining. The performance of these AD methods usually depends on the representation ability of normal patterns and the quality of training data. However, most deep unsupervised AD methods do not capture the distribution characteristics and the diversity of normal patterns effectively. In the meantime, they ignore the interference of abnormal samples on the model in training data with anomaly contamination. To tackle these issues, this article proposes a method named landmark block-embedded aggregation autoencoder (LBAA) for AD. LBAA constructs a filter and an aggregation autoencoder by introducing a novel normal feature learning approach to improve data quality and adjust its distribution differences from anomalies. In the normal feature learning, we define a landmark block to represent distribution of a normal class and an adaptive selection mechanism of landmark blocks’ number to obtain diverse normal features. On the basis, the filter is constructed to filter distinct anomalies and improve the quality of the contaminated training data. Then, a weighted objective function is proposed to train the aggregation autoencoder. The function can reduce the interference of anomalies and realize the aggregation of normal samples to increase the feature differences between normal and abnormal samples. Next, the trained aggregation autoencoder calculates the anomaly score of each sample by summing the reconstruction error and its median sparseness to the landmark blocks. Finally, we report on a comprehensive experiment on multiple datasets. The obtained results validate the effectiveness and robustness of LBAA.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics SystemsSame topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207