Harnessing Contrastive Learning and Neural Transformation for Time Series Anomaly Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Time series anomaly detection (TSAD) plays a vital role in many industrial applications. While contrastive learning has gained momentum in the time series domain for its prowess in extracting meaningful representations from unlabeled data, its straightforward application to anomaly detection is not without hurdles. Firstly, contrastive learning typically requires negative sampling to avoid the representation collapse issue, where the encoder converges to a constant solution. However, drawing from the same dataset for dissimilar samples is ill-suited for TSAD as most samples are “normal” in the training dataset. Secondly, conventional contrastive learning focuses on instance discrimination, which may overlook anomalies that are detectable when compared to their temporal context. In this study, we propose a novel approach, CNT, that incorporates a window-based contrastive learning strategy fortified with learnable transformations. This dual configuration focuses on capturing temporal anomalies in local regions while simultaneously mitigating the representation collapse issue. Our theoretical analysis validates the effectiveness of CNT in circumventing constant encoder solutions. Through extensive experiments on diverse real-world industrial datasets, we show the superiority of our framework by outperforming various baselines and model variants.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".