Calibrated Unsupervised Anomaly Detection in Multivariate Time-Series Using Reinforcement Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates unsupervised anomaly detection in multivariate time-series data using reinforcement learning (RL) in the latent space of an autoencoder. A significant challenge is the limited availability of anomalous data, often leading to misclassifying anomalies as normal events, thus raising false negatives. RL can help overcome this limitation by promoting exploration and balancing exploitation during training, effectively preventing overfitting. Wavelet analysis is also utilized to enhance anomaly detection, enabling time-series data decomposition into both time and frequency domains. This approach captures anomalies at multiple resolutions, with wavelet coefficients extracted to detect both sudden and subtle shifts in the data, thereby refining the anomaly detection process. We calibrate the decision boundary by generating synthetic anomalies and embedding a supervised framework within the model. This supervised element aids the unsupervised learning process by fine-tuning the decision boundary and increasing the model's capacity to distinguish between normal and anomalous patterns effectively.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".