Out of Distribution Detection via Normalizing Flows for Open World Machine Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Out-of-distribution (OOD) detection is a critical task for safe deployment of learning systems in the open world setting. Traditional machine learning systems are trained with a “closed world” assumption: they are optimized for a fixed set of training data, validated against a set of reserved data, and then deployed to the “open world” - where they may encounter unfamiliar data. In this work, we investigate the use of feature density estimation via normalizing flows for OOD detection and present a fully unsupervised approach which requires no exposure to OOD data, avoiding researcher bias in OOD sample selection. This is a post-hoc method which can be applied to any pretrained model, and involves training a lightweight auxiliary normalizing flow model to perform the out-of-distribution detection via density thresholding. Experiments on OOD detection in image classification show strong results for far-OOD data detection with only a single epoch of flow training, including 98.2% AUROC for ImageNet-1k vs. Textures, which exceeds the state of the art by 7.8%. We additionally explore the connection between the feature space distribution of the pretrained model and the performance of our method. Finally, we provide insights into training pitfalls that have plagued normalizing flows for use in OOD detection.
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 | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".