{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2022:K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP","short_pith_number":"pith:K352MRPI","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"56fba645e8fc01da2bda67bb2e498b1bc38fe1526f026a99b10a41113cf85a6d","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2206.09426","version":2},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"ADBench: Anomaly Detection Benchmark","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.AI"],"primary_cat":"cs.LG","authors_text":"Hailiang Huang, Mingqi Jiang, Songqiao Han, Xiyang Hu, Yue Zhao","submitted_at":"2022-06-19T15:02:17Z","abstract_excerpt":"Given a long list of anomaly detection algorithms developed in the last few decades, how do they perform with regard to (i) varying levels of supervision, (ii) different types of anomalies, and (iii) noisy and corrupted data? In this work, we answer these key questions by conducting (to our best knowledge) the most comprehensive anomaly detection benchmark with 30 algorithms on 57 benchmark datasets, named ADBench. Our extensive experiments (98,436 in total) identify meaningful insights into the role of supervision and anomaly types, and unlock future directions for researchers in algorithm se"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2206.09426","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"metadata":{"license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","primary_cat":"cs.LG","submitted_at":"2022-06-19T15:02:17Z","cross_cats_sorted":["cs.AI"],"title_canon_sha256":"3630c0485880beaf708e6b4100c43896089718d55e09edbdea7201081ecf77ec","abstract_canon_sha256":"c66f74ca3b62bad5c93676232a3101f60aa49cbf0e501f00259b3e727acfef38"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T04:58:16.367563Z","signature_b64":"D9OzChmYi7vZnxHFgfVR99kRs0levqaFyy/DnuXi2mYEyRC+G7J9KN8hJiu6/4Z0fQxLMKjl3FjHIwJGCDYMAQ==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"56fba645e8fc01da2bda67bb2e498b1bc38fe1526f026a99b10a41113cf85a6d","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T04:58:16.367087Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T04:58:16.367087Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"ADBench: Anomaly Detection Benchmark","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.AI"],"primary_cat":"cs.LG","authors_text":"Hailiang Huang, Mingqi Jiang, Songqiao Han, Xiyang Hu, Yue Zhao","submitted_at":"2022-06-19T15:02:17Z","abstract_excerpt":"Given a long list of anomaly detection algorithms developed in the last few decades, how do they perform with regard to (i) varying levels of supervision, (ii) different types of anomalies, and (iii) noisy and corrupted data? In this work, we answer these key questions by conducting (to our best knowledge) the most comprehensive anomaly detection benchmark with 30 algorithms on 57 benchmark datasets, named ADBench. Our extensive experiments (98,436 in total) identify meaningful insights into the role of supervision and anomaly types, and unlock future directions for researchers in algorithm se"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2206.09426","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2206.09426/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2206.09426","created_at":"2026-07-05T04:58:16.367144+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2206.09426v2","created_at":"2026-07-05T04:58:16.367144+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2206.09426","created_at":"2026-07-05T04:58:16.367144+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"K352MRPI7QA5","created_at":"2026-07-05T04:58:16.367144+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"K352MRPI7QA5UK62","created_at":"2026-07-05T04:58:16.367144+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"K352MRPI","created_at":"2026-07-05T04:58:16.367144+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":3,"internal_anchor_count":0,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.08717","citing_title":"Debugging the Debuggers: Failure-Anchored Structured Recovery for Software Engineering Agents","ref_index":16,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2602.06810","citing_title":"Calibrating Tabular Anomaly Detection via Optimal Transport","ref_index":15,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.08717","citing_title":"Debugging the Debuggers: Failure-Anchored Structured Recovery for Software Engineering Agents","ref_index":16,"is_internal_anchor":false}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP","json":"https://pith.science/pith/K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/K352MRPI"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/K352MRPI","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2206.09426&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/K352MRPI7QA5UK62M65S4SMLDP/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T04:58:16.367144+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T04:58:16.367144+00:00"}