Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 7 minor 45 references

Patch-aware Vector Quantized Codebook Learning for Unsupervised Visual Defect Detection

T0 review · 5 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A patch-aware VQ-VAE that dynamically allocates code resolution by context richness, plus learned normal budget priors, is claimed to achieve state-of-the-art unsupervised defect detection on MVTecAD, BTAD, and MTSD.

desk verdict A coherent VQ-VAE extension with genuinely new dynamic code allocation and a budget prior, but the SOTA claim rests on a modified HVQ-Trans baseline and a nonstandard protocol. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.09187 v1 pith:G33WVBTQ submitted 2025-01-15 cs.CV cs.AIcs.LG

Qisen Cheng , Shuhui Qu , Janghwan Lee This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.AIcs.LG
keywords unsuperviseddefectdetectionvectorquantizationVQ-VAEdynamiccodeallocationnormalbudgetprioranomalyMVTecADrepresentationlearning
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that the tension in unsupervised defect detection between expressive and compact representations can be resolved by letting the model decide, per image region, how many latent codes to spend. It proposes a patch-aware VQ-VAE where a routing module chooses coarse or fine code resolutions according to context richness, guided by a budget loss that makes fine codes costly. The learned allocation patterns on normal data are stored as priors by a small transformer, and at test time a defect score multiplies reconstruction error by deviation from the predicted normal budget. The paper reports that this scheme outperforms memory-based and reconstruction-based baselines on three industrial datasets with a single model trained across all object classes. If correct, the contribution is a data-driven answer to codebook capacity selection, one of the main knobs in VQ-based anomaly detection.

What carries the argument

The core machinery is patch-aware dynamic code allocation: an encoder produces feature embeddings at several resolutions, and a Dynamic Routing Module (average pooling, MLP gating, Gumbel-Softmax) picks a resolution for each patch. A budget loss, whose cost is the inverse of the discrete wavelet entropy of each patch scaled by resolution, pushes the model toward economical codes. A frozen pass records the chosen resolution matrix as a sequence, a Budget Prior Transformer learns to predict each region's resolution from the rest, and the final defect score is the pixel-wise product of the cross-entropy between the dynamic budget and the predicted normal budget and the L2 reconstruction error.

What would settle it

Build or select a test set of defective images in which the defect covers more than half the image or appears as many scattered regions, and measure image-level AUROC with and without the S_prior term; if the paper's mechanism is the cause of the gain, the product score loses its advantage and performance falls toward reconstruction-only, exactly where the paper's localized-defect assumption is violated.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

PVQAE claims that replacing fixed, uniform codebook allocation with a learned, context-dependent budget—fine codes for rich-detail regions, coarse codes for simple ones—and recording the resulting normal budgets as priors lets a single VQ-VAE-based model detect defects across many object classes at once. At inference, defects are scored by the product of how much a region's dynamically chosen resolution deviates from its predicted normal budget and how poorly that region reconstructs. On MVTecAD, BTAD, and MTSD the paper reports image- and pixel-level AUROC at or above memory-based (PaDiM, PatchCore) and reconstruction-based (VQ-E, HVQ-Trans) baselines, with ablations showing the linear budget-loss schedule and per-class priors contribute most of the gain.

Load-bearing premise

The method assumes defects are localized and that most regions of a defective image still look normal, so a transformer can predict each region's normal code budget from its neighbors; if a defect is large or scattered, the normal-budget prior stops flagging it and only reconstruction error remains.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single model can cover multiple product classes, removing the need to train a separate detector for each object type.
  • The normal budget prior acts as a second detection signal beyond reconstruction, so defects that happen to reconstruct well can still be caught by their unusual code-allocation pattern.
  • The progressive budget-learning schedule (linearly increasing the budget-loss weight) and per-class priors both improve AUROC over constant weighting and universal priors, as shown in the paper's ablations.
  • Resolution maps become a visible side output: they show where the model expects detail, which can localize defects and make detection decisions more interpretable.
  • The method keeps VQ's efficiency, spending few and coarse codes on smooth surfaces and reserving fine codes only for intricate normal regions.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension is to apply the same budget-prior mechanism to medical or satellite anomaly detection, where the 'defects are localized' assumption also often holds and where per-class priors could be learned from healthy anatomy rather than product textures.
  • Because the score is a product of a prior term and a reconstruction term, one could test replacing the pixel-space L2 reconstruction error with a feature-space distance to reduce sensitivity to lighting and sensor noise.
  • The paper does not explore how the budget prior degrades as defect area grows; a reader could measure the prior term's contribution separately on large-defect samples to map the boundary of the method's stated assumption.
  • The dynamic routing could be reused as a self-supervised pretraining signal: the predicted normal budget for a patch could supervise the router on unlabeled mixed-class data, potentially removing the need for class tokens at inference.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper proposes PVQAE, a VQ-VAE-based framework for unsupervised visual defect detection. The model introduces a patch-aware dynamic code assignment scheme in which a dynamic routing module selects one of several code resolutions per image patch using a Gumbel-Softmax mechanism, guided by a budget loss based on DWT entropy. A Budget Prior Transformer learns normal code-budget sequences, and the final defect score combines a cross-entropy prior-mismatch term with the L2 reconstruction error. Experiments on MVTecAD, BTAD, and MTSD report image- and pixel-level AUROC against memory-based and reconstruction-based baselines, with ablations on the budget-loss schedule and on normal budget priors.

Significance. The core idea is coherent and potentially useful: learning a context-dependent code allocation instead of fixing the representation capacity per image is a reasonable way to address the expressiveness-compactness trade-off in VQ-based anomaly detection. The ablations on the loss schedule and on the use of class-conditioned priors are informative, and the method is evaluated on three public datasets. However, the paper's central state-of-the-art claim is not yet reliably supported because the strongest baseline is modified, the evaluation protocol is nonstandard and not fully controlled, the key hyperparameter is selected on the test set, and no uncertainty estimates are reported. If these issues are addressed, the method could be a meaningful contribution to multi-object unsupervised defect detection.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section IV-A, Table I] The state-of-the-art claim in Section IV-B rests on a comparison against a modified HVQ-Trans baseline: Section IV-A states that the public implementation was used 'excluding the optimal-transport objective from HVQ-Trans to focus on representation learning comparison.' Because the optimal-transport objective is a core component of HVQ-Trans's codebook assignment, removing it changes the method being compared. The authors should either run the unmodified HVQ-Trans under the same protocol or explicitly restrict the claim to the ablated baseline.
  2. [Section IV-A, Section IV-B.1, Table I] The evaluation protocol is not controlled across baselines. The paper states that for fairness all methods were trained and tested on multiple objects simultaneously for MVTecAD, but standard MVTecAD evaluations are per-class, and the table does not identify which baseline numbers were produced under the multi-object retraining protocol and which, if any, were taken from published per-class results. Without retraining every baseline under identical conditions and reporting those conditions, the comparison in Table I cannot support the claimed superiority.
  3. [Figure 5, Section IV-B] No error bars or multiple-seed results are reported, and the terminal budget-loss weight is selected by maximizing test-set AUROC on MVTecAD (Figure 5). Since this weight is a key hyperparameter of the method, choosing it on the test set makes the reported numbers optimistic and prevents assessment of whether the improvement is significant. The authors should use a validation split or report the full sensitivity curve with uncertainty estimates.
  4. [Table I] Even under the authors' protocol, the reported numbers do not show uniform superiority over PatchCore: on Leather, PatchCore achieves 100/98.2 while PVQAE achieves 99.4/97.5, and on Bottle the image-level AUROC ties at 100. No mean AUROC across the 15 MVTecAD classes or statistical significance test is reported, so the blanket 'state-of-the-art performance' statement in Section IV-B is stronger than the table demonstrates.
  5. [Section III-C.1] The normal-budget-prior component assumes that defects are localized and that most regions of a defective image still look normal, so a transformer can predict a defective region's normal budget from its neighbors. The paper does not test the limits of this assumption; if a defect is large or appears in many scattered regions, S_prior will not fire and detection falls back entirely on S_recon. An experiment varying defect area would clarify the method's operating range.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Section III-B.1] The Gumbel-Softmax equation is garbled; the denominator should be a sum over r of exp((g^r + delta^r)/tau), and the constraint sum_r b^r = 1 should be written as a separate equation.
  2. [Section III-B.2] The budget-loss equation is not typeset correctly, and the cost multiplier is defined as c = 2R-1 even though R was introduced as a set of resolutions; please clarify whether R here denotes the number of resolution levels.
  3. [Section IV-A] The dataset name is written as both MTSD and MSTD in the same subsection; please standardize it.
  4. [Section II-A] Reference [16] is the ImageNet classification paper and does not support the statement about 'minimal-volume spheres' for one-class classification; the intended reference appears to be missing or misnumbered.
  5. [Section III-C.2] The final score is called a pixel-wise product S = S_prior x S_recon, but S_prior is defined as a normalized scalar and S_recon as an L2 image; the dimensionality and alignment of the two terms should be specified.
  6. [Section IV-A] The statement that public implementations from [42] and [14] were used is confusing because [42] is a dataset paper (Real-IAD), not an implementation; please correct the citation.
  7. [Section V] The sentence 'It improves enhances the conventional VQ-VAE' contains a typo; please revise.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: PVQAE is an empirical training-and-evaluation pipeline with no prediction that reduces to its own inputs.

full rationale

The paper makes no first-principles derivation; PVQAE is a learned VQ-VAE variant. The dynamic code allocation is trained with a DWT-entropy-weighted budget loss on normal data, and the Budget Prior Transformer is trained on the resulting normal-code allocation sequences via masked cross-entropy (L_Prior). At test time, S_prior compares the input's dynamically routed budget to the neighbor-predicted normal budget, and S_recon is an independent L2 reconstruction error; neither score is definitionally equal to a training target. The claimed SOTA is an empirical result whose main weaknesses are comparability and reproducibility concerns: Section IV-A strips the optimal-transport objective from the HVQ-Trans baseline, Figure 5 selects the budget-loss weight using test-set AUROC, and no code or error bars are provided. These issues affect the strength of the empirical claim but are not circular reasoning. The only self-citations ([2], [3], [4], [9], [34], [37]) are motivational or related-work references and are not load-bearing for the method's derivation. The localized-defect assumption in Section III-C.1 is a stated limitation with a fallback scoring path (S_recon), not a circular step.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central method rests on hand-chosen hyperparameters (lambda, c, tau, resolution hierarchy) and several domain assumptions about defect localization and entropy-based context richness. No new physical entities are postulated; the 'normal budget prior' is a learned quantity, not an independent postulate.

free parameters (5)
  • Budget loss terminal weight lambda_max = 1.25 (tuned on MVTecAD test set)
    The paper sweeps the terminal lambda from 0.5 to 2.5 in steps of 0.25, and Figure 5 shows peak performance at 1.25; that value is used for the final reported results.
  • Resolution hierarchy R = 3 levels from last three encoder blocks (exact sizes not reported)
    The candidate resolutions come from outputs of the last three encoder blocks; the paper does not state the spatial sizes or how they map to r1, r2, r3.
  • Cost multiplier c = 2^(R-1), i.e. 2 or 4 depending on R
    The budget loss scales code cost by c^r with c chosen by hand as 2^(R-1); this controls how strongly fine codes are penalized.
  • Gumbel-Softmax temperature tau = not reported
    Tau controls how close the routing scores are to one-hot; the schedule for annealing tau is not stated.
  • Budget loss ramp schedule = linear from 0 to lambda_max
    The paper compares constant, cosine, and linear schedules and selects the linear schedule based on test AUROC.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Defects are localized; most regions of a defective image remain normal.
    Stated in Section III-C.1; the Budget Prior Transformer's masked prediction relies on surrounding normal regions to infer normal budgets.
  • domain assumption Normalized DWT entropy of an image patch measures context richness and is a valid guide for code resolution.
    The budget loss in Section III-B.2 defines cost as inverse entropy; this assumes texture complexity is the right signal for representation capacity in defect detection.
  • domain assumption A single VQ codebook and a single model can represent multiple object classes without mode collapse.
    The paper trains one model across all MVTecAD classes and claims this is beneficial; no theoretical or empirical proof is provided beyond the reported numbers.
  • standard math The straight-through estimator and Gumbel-Softmax provide usable gradients for the discrete routing and quantization steps.
    Both are established techniques (STE from VQ-VAE [39], Gumbel-Softmax [41]); the paper relies on them without proof.
  • domain assumption Masked token prediction in the Budget Prior Transformer captures the normal budget distribution.
    The paper assumes that correlations among resolution levels across image regions are learnable by a single transformer block; no analysis of the capacity needed is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Patch-aware Vector Quantized Codebook Learning for Unsupervised Visual Defect Detection." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/G33WVBTQ

@misc{pith2026250109187,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Patch-aware Vector Quantized Codebook Learning for Unsupervised Visual Defect Detection},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/G33WVBTQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.09187}
}
read the original abstract

Unsupervised visual defect detection is critical in industrial applications, requiring a representation space that captures normal data features while detecting deviations. Achieving a balance between expressiveness and compactness is challenging; an overly expressive space risks inefficiency and mode collapse, impairing detection accuracy. We propose a novel approach using an enhanced VQ-VAE framework optimized for unsupervised defect detection. Our model introduces a patch-aware dynamic code assignment scheme, enabling context-sensitive code allocation to optimize spatial representation. This strategy enhances normal-defect distinction and improves detection accuracy during inference. Experiments on MVTecAD, BTAD, and MTSD datasets show our method achieves state-of-the-art performance.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.09187 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Concept of unsupervised defect detection using patch-aware codebook [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Visualization of PVQAE model. It extends the vector quantization technique with 1) patch-aware codebook learning to optimize the representation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Detailed architecture of Dynamic Routing Module [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Pixel-level defect detection samples on MVTecAD dataset. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Defect detection performance on MVTecAD vs. budget loss weight [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Visual-based defect detection and classifica- tion approaches for industrial applications—a survey,

    T. Czimmermann, G. Ciuti, M. Milazzo, M. Chiurazzi, S. Roccella, C. M. Oddo, and P. Dario, “Visual-based defect detection and classifica- tion approaches for industrial applications—a survey,” Sensors, vol. 20, no. 5, p. 1459, 2020

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    72-3: Deep learning based visual defect detection in noisy and imbalanced data,

    Q. Cheng, S. Qu, and J. Lee, “72-3: Deep learning based visual defect detection in noisy and imbalanced data,” in SID Symposium Digest of Technical Papers, vol. 53, pp. 971–974, Wiley Online Library, 2022

    2022

  3. [3]

    6-4: Deep learning for classification of repairable defects in display panels using multi-modal data,

    K. Balakrishnan, Q. Cheng, J. Lee, D. Jeong, E. Kim, and J. Kim, “6-4: Deep learning for classification of repairable defects in display panels using multi-modal data,” in SID Symposium Digest of Technical Papers , vol. 54, pp. 58–61, Wiley Online Library, 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    32-1: Improving qd backplane defect image generation using automatic masking in diffusion models,

    Z. Pan, R. Shenoy, K. Balakrishnan, Q. Cheng, J. Lee, Y . Jeon, D. Jeong, and J. Kim, “32-1: Improving qd backplane defect image generation using automatic masking in diffusion models,” in SID Symposium Digest of Technical Papers, vol. 55, pp. 409–412, Wiley Online Library, 2024

    2024

  5. [5]

    Automatic fabric defect detection with a multi-scale convolutional denoising autoencoder network model,

    S. Mei, Y . Wang, and G. Wen, “Automatic fabric defect detection with a multi-scale convolutional denoising autoencoder network model,” Sensors, vol. 18, no. 4, p. 1064, 2018

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    A generic deep-learning-based approach for automated surface inspection,

    R. Ren, T. Hung, and K. C. Tan, “A generic deep-learning-based approach for automated surface inspection,” IEEE transactions on cy- bernetics, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 929–940, 2017

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Research on the application of computer vision based on deep learning in autonomous driving technology,

    J. Zhang, J. Cao, J. Chang, X. Li, H. Liu, and Z. Li, “Research on the application of computer vision based on deep learning in autonomous driving technology,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.00490 , 2024

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    A vehicle classification method based on machine learning,

    X. Li, J. Chang, T. Li, W. Fan, Y . Ma, and H. Ni, “A vehicle classification method based on machine learning,” 2024

    work page 2024

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    Estimation of energy and time usage in 3d printing with multimodal neural network,

    Q. Cheng, C. Zhang, and X. Shen, “Estimation of energy and time usage in 3d printing with multimodal neural network,” in 2022 4th International Conference on Frontiers Technology of Information and Computer (ICFTIC) , pp. 900–903, IEEE, 2022

    2022

  2. [10]

    Deep industrial image anomaly detection: A survey,

    J. Liu, G. Xie, J. Wang, S. Li, C. Wang, F. Zheng, and Y . Jin, “Deep industrial image anomaly detection: A survey,” Machine Intelligence Research, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 104–135, 2024

    2024

  3. [11]

    Simple and effective prevention of mode collapse in deep one-class classification,

    P. Chong, L. Ruff, M. Kloft, and A. Binder, “Simple and effective prevention of mode collapse in deep one-class classification,” in 2020 international joint conference on neural networks (IJCNN) , pp. 1–9, IEEE, 2020

    2020

  4. [12]

    Padim: a patch distri- bution modeling framework for anomaly detection and localization,

    T. Defard, A. Setkov, A. Loesch, and R. Audigier, “Padim: a patch distri- bution modeling framework for anomaly detection and localization,” in International Conference on Pattern Recognition, pp. 475–489, Springer, 2021

    2021

  5. [13]

    Towards total recall in industrial anomaly detection,

    K. Roth, L. Pemula, J. Zepeda, B. Sch ¨olkopf, T. Brox, and P. Gehler, “Towards total recall in industrial anomaly detection,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.08265, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Hierarchi- cal vector quantized transformer for multi-class unsupervised anomaly detection,

    R. Lu, Y . Wu, L. Tian, D. Wang, B. Chen, X. Liu, and R. Hu, “Hierarchi- cal vector quantized transformer for multi-class unsupervised anomaly detection,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , vol. 36, pp. 8487–8500, 2023

    2023

  7. [15]

    Memorizing normality to detect anomaly: Memory- augmented deep autoencoder for unsupervised anomaly detection,

    D. Gong, L. Liu, V . Le, B. Saha, M. R. Mansour, S. Venkatesh, and A. v. d. Hengel, “Memorizing normality to detect anomaly: Memory- augmented deep autoencoder for unsupervised anomaly detection,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pp. ...

    2019

  8. [16]

    Imagenet: A large-scale hierarchical image database,

    J. Deng, W. Dong, R. Socher, L.-J. Li, K. Li, and L. Fei-Fei, “Imagenet: A large-scale hierarchical image database,” in 2009 IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pp. 248–255, IEEE, 2009

    2009

  9. [17]

    Deep one-class classification,

    L. Ruff, R. Vandermeulen, N. Goernitz, L. Deecke, S. A. Siddiqui, A. Binder, E. M ¨uller, and M. Kloft, “Deep one-class classification,” in International conference on machine learning , pp. 4393–4402, PMLR, 2018

    2018

  10. [18]

    Deep anomaly detection using geometric transformations,

    I. Golan and R. El-Yaniv, “Deep anomaly detection using geometric transformations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.10917 , 2018

    2018 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Patch svdd: Patch-level svdd for anomaly detection and segmentation,

    J. Yi and S. Yoon, “Patch svdd: Patch-level svdd for anomaly detection and segmentation,” in Proceedings of the Asian Conference on Computer Vision, 2020

    2020

  12. [20]

    Enhancing eye-tracking performance through multi-task learning transformer,

    W. Li, N. Zhou, and X. Qu, “Enhancing eye-tracking performance through multi-task learning transformer,” in International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction , pp. 31–46, Springer, 2024

    2024

  13. [21]

    Cutpaste: Self-supervised learning for anomaly detection and localization,

    C.-L. Li, K. Sohn, J. Yoon, and T. Pfister, “Cutpaste: Self-supervised learning for anomaly detection and localization,” pp. 9664–9674, 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    Anomaly detection using autoencoders with nonlinear dimensionality reduction,

    M. Sakurada and T. Yairi, “Anomaly detection using autoencoders with nonlinear dimensionality reduction,” in Proceedings of the MLSDA 2014 2nd workshop on machine learning for sensory data analysis , pp. 4–11, 2014

    2014

  15. [23]

    Deep architecture for high- speed railway insulator surface defect detection: Denoising autoencoder with multitask learning,

    G. Kang, S. Gao, L. Yu, and D. Zhang, “Deep architecture for high- speed railway insulator surface defect detection: Denoising autoencoder with multitask learning,” IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 68, no. 8, pp. 2679–2690, 2018

    2018

  16. [24]

    Adversarially learned one-class classifier for novelty detection,

    M. Sabokrou, M. Khalooei, M. Fathy, and E. Adeli, “Adversarially learned one-class classifier for novelty detection,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pp. 3379–3388, 2018

    2018

  17. [25]

    At- tention guided anomaly localization in images,

    S. Venkataramanan, K.-C. Peng, R. V . Singh, and A. Mahalanobis, “At- tention guided anomaly localization in images,” in European Conference on Computer Vision , pp. 485–503, Springer, 2020

    2020

  18. [26]

    Deep autoencoding gaussian mixture model for unsupervised anomaly detection,

    B. Zong, Q. Song, M. R. Min, W. Cheng, C. Lumezanu, D. Cho, and H. Chen, “Deep autoencoding gaussian mixture model for unsupervised anomaly detection,” in International conference on learning representa- tions, 2018

    2018

  19. [27]

    Same same but differnet: Semi-supervised defect detection with normalizing flows,

    M. Rudolph, B. Wandt, and B. Rosenhahn, “Same same but differnet: Semi-supervised defect detection with normalizing flows,” in Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, pp. 1907–1916, 2021

    1907

  20. [28]

    Cflow-ad: Real-time unsu- pervised anomaly detection with localization via conditional normalizing flows,

    D. Gudovskiy, S. Ishizaka, and K. Kozuka, “Cflow-ad: Real-time unsu- pervised anomaly detection with localization via conditional normalizing flows,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.12571 , 2021

    2021 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Uninformed students: Student-teacher anomaly detection with discriminative latent embeddings,

    P. Bergmann, M. Fauser, D. Sattlegger, and C. Steger, “Uninformed students: Student-teacher anomaly detection with discriminative latent embeddings,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pp. 4183–4192, 2020

    2020

  22. [30]

    Student-teacher feature pyra- mid matching for anomaly detection,

    G. Wang, S. Han, E. Ding, and D. Huang, “Student-teacher feature pyra- mid matching for anomaly detection,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.04257 , 2021

    2021 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Sub-image anomaly detection with deep pyramid correspondences,

    N. Cohen and Y . Hoshen, “Sub-image anomaly detection with deep pyramid correspondences,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.02357 , 2020

    2005 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Gersho and R

    A. Gersho and R. M. Gray, V ector quantization and signal compression, vol. 159. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

    2012

  25. [33]

    Neural discrete representation learning,

    A. Van Den Oord, O. Vinyals, et al. , “Neural discrete representation learning,” Advances in neural information processing systems , vol. 30, 2017

    2017

  26. [34]

    Exploring ai music generation: A review of deep learning algorithms and datasets for undergraduate researchers,

    I. Yunoki, G. Berreby, N. D’Andrea, Y . Lu, and X. Qu, “Exploring ai music generation: A review of deep learning algorithms and datasets for undergraduate researchers,” in International Conference on Human- Computer Interaction , pp. 102–116, Springer, 2023

    2023

  27. [35]

    Taming transformers for high- resolution image synthesis,

    P. Esser, R. Rombach, and B. Ommer, “Taming transformers for high- resolution image synthesis,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pp. 12873–12883, 2021

    2021

  28. [36]

    Integrated optimization of large language models: Synergizing data utilization and compression techniques,

    X. Li, Y . Ma, Y . Huang, X. Wang, Y . Lin, and C. Zhang, “Integrated optimization of large language models: Synergizing data utilization and compression techniques,” 2024

    2024

  29. [37]

    Optimizing the literature review process: Evaluating generative ai models on sum- marizing undergraduate data science research papers,

    T. Saunders, N. Aleisa, J. Wield, J. Sherwood, and X. Qu, “Optimizing the literature review process: Evaluating generative ai models on sum- marizing undergraduate data science research papers,” in Proceedings of the 30th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data M...

    2024

  30. [38]

    Patch- wise vector quantization for unsupervised medical anomaly detection,

    T. Kim, Y .-G. Lee, I. Jeong, S.-Y . Ham, and S. S. Woo, “Patch- wise vector quantization for unsupervised medical anomaly detection,” Pattern Recognition Letters , 2024

    2024

  31. [39]

    Neural discrete representation learning,

    A. van den Oord, O. Vinyals, and K. Kavukcuoglu, “Neural discrete representation learning,” in Proceedings of the 31st International Confer- ence on Neural Information Processing Systems , pp. 6309–6318, 2017

    2017

  32. [40]

    Towards accurate image coding: Improved autoregressive image generation with dynamic vector quantization,

    M. Huang, Z. Mao, Z. Chen, and Y . Zhang, “Towards accurate image coding: Improved autoregressive image generation with dynamic vector quantization,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pp. 22596–22605, 2023

    2023

  33. [41]

    Categorical reparameterization with gumbel-softmax,

    E. Jang, S. Gu, and B. Poole, “Categorical reparameterization with gumbel-softmax,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.01144 , 2016

    2016 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Real-iad: A real-world multi-view dataset for benchmarking versatile industrial anomaly detection,

    C. Wang, W. Zhu, B.-B. Gao, Z. Gan, J. Zhang, Z. Gu, S. Qian, M. Chen, and L. Ma, “Real-iad: A real-world multi-view dataset for benchmarking versatile industrial anomaly detection,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pp. 228...

    2024

  35. [43]

    Mvtec ad–a comprehensive real-world dataset for unsupervised anomaly detection,

    P. Bergmann, M. Fauser, D. Sattlegger, and C. Steger, “Mvtec ad–a comprehensive real-world dataset for unsupervised anomaly detection,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 9592–9600, 2019

    2019

  36. [44]

    Vt- adl: A vision transformer network for image anomaly detection and localization,

    P. Mishra, R. Verk, D. Fornasier, C. Piciarelli, and G. L. Foresti, “Vt- adl: A vision transformer network for image anomaly detection and localization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.10036 , 2021

    2021 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Surface defect saliency of magnetic tile,

    Y . Huang, C. Qiu, and K. Yuan, “Surface defect saliency of magnetic tile,” The Visual Computer , vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 85–96, 2020

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.