REVIEW 3 cited by
Classification-Based Anomaly Detection for General Data
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Anomaly detection, finding patterns that substantially deviate from those seen previously, is one of the fundamental problems of artificial intelligence. Recently, classification-based methods were shown to achieve superior results on this task. In this work, we present a unifying view and propose an open-set method, GOAD, to relax current generalization assumptions. Furthermore, we extend the applicability of transformation-based methods to non-image data using random affine transformations. Our method is shown to obtain state-of-the-art accuracy and is applicable to broad data types. The strong performance of our method is extensively validated on multiple datasets from different domains.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
CORE: In-Context Reconstruction for Unified Tabular Anomaly Detection
CORE detects anomalies in new tabular datasets by reconstructing each test sample from the nearest normal context samples in a learned, feature-aligned space; it is proposed as the first reconstruction-based unified t...
-
ReTabAD: A Benchmark for Restoring Semantic Context in Tabular Anomaly Detection
A new 20-dataset benchmark with textual metadata reports that zero-shot LLMs detect tabular anomalies better when given semantic context, but label descriptions embedded in the metadata may explain much of the gain.
-
Investigating Mask-aware Prototype Learning for Tabular Anomaly Detection
A new tabular anomaly detection model, PTAD, combines learnable masks in two spaces with optimal transport distances to learned prototypes and reports the best average AUC-PR and AUC-ROC on 20 benchmarks.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.