Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

A Meta-level Analysis of Online Anomaly Detectors

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

arxiv 2209.05899 v2 pith:5BACTOU3 submitted 2022-09-13 cs.LG cs.AI

classification cs.LGcs.AI
keywords detectorsonlineanalysischaracteristicsdetectiondifferentwhatalgorithmic
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Real-time detection of anomalies in streaming data is receiving increasing attention as it allows us to raise alerts, predict faults, and detect intrusions or threats across industries. Yet, little attention has been given to compare the effectiveness and efficiency of anomaly detectors for streaming data (i.e., of online algorithms). In this paper, we present a qualitative, synthetic overview of major online detectors from different algorithmic families (i.e., distance, density, tree or projection-based) and highlight their main ideas for constructing, updating and testing detection models. Then, we provide a thorough analysis of the results of a quantitative experimental evaluation of online detection algorithms along with their offline counterparts. The behavior of the detectors is correlated with the characteristics of different datasets (i.e., meta-features), thereby providing a meta-level analysis of their performance. Our study addresses several missing insights from the literature such as (a) how reliable are detectors against a random classifier and what dataset characteristics make them perform randomly; (b) to what extent online detectors approximate the performance of offline counterparts; (c) which sketch strategy and update primitives of detectors are best to detect anomalies visible only within a feature subspace of a dataset; (d) what are the tradeoffs between the effectiveness and the efficiency of detectors belonging to different algorithmic families; (e) which specific characteristics of datasets yield an online algorithm to outperform all others.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A Comparative Analysis of Influence Signals for Data Debugging

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A benchmark shows Self-Influence finds mislabeled training samples, while all tested influence signals fail to detect clustered anomalies and outliers under cumulative TracIn scoring.

Pith tools