The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Anomaly detection in dynamic networks: a survey
Open accessAbstract
Anomaly detection is an important problem with multiple applications, and thus has been studied for decades in various research domains. In the past decade there has been a growing interest in anomaly detection in data represented as networks, or graphs, largely because of their robust expressiveness and their natural ability to represent complex relationships. Originally, techniques focused on anomaly detection in static graphs, which do not change and are capable of representing only a single snapshot of data. As real‐world networks are constantly changing, there has been a shift in focus to dynamic graphs, which evolve over time. In this survey, we aim to provide a comprehensive overview of anomaly detection in dynamic networks, concentrating on the state‐of‐the‐art methods. We first describe four types of anomalies that arise in dynamic networks, providing an intuitive explanation, applications, and a concrete example for each. Having established an idea for what constitutes an anomaly, a general two‐stage approach to anomaly detection in dynamic networks that is common among the methods is presented. We then construct a two‐tiered taxonomy, first partitioning the methods based on the intuition behind their approach, and subsequently subdividing them based on the types of anomalies they detect. Within each of the tier one categories—community, compression, decomposition, distance, and probabilistic model based—we highlight the major similarities and differences, showing the wealth of techniques derived from similar conceptual approaches.WIREs Comput Stat 2015, 7:223–247. doi: 10.1002/wics.1347 This article is categorized under:Algorithms and Computational Methods > Algorithms Data: Types and Structure > Graph and Network Data Statistical Learning and Exploratory Methods of the Data Sciences > Pattern Recognition
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Fortunato, S. (2010) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2009.11.002 · Cited by 11,293
LOF: identifying density-based local outliers
Breunig, M. M., Kriegel, H.-P., Ng, R. T., & Sander, J. (2000) · ACM SIGMOD Record · doi:10.1145/335191.335388 · Cited by 5,207
LOF: identifying density-based local outliers
Breunig, M. M., Kriegel, H.-P., Ng, R. T., & Sander, J. (2000) · Proceedings of the 2000 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data · doi:10.1145/342009.335388 · Cited by 4,149
Hawkins, D. M. (1980) · doi:10.1007/978-94-015-3994-4 · Cited by 2,982
Singular value decomposition and least squares solutions
Golub, G. H., & Reinsch, C. (1970) · Numerische Mathematik · doi:10.1007/bf02163027 · Cited by 2,929
Graph based anomaly detection and description: a survey
Akoglu, L., Tong, H., & Koutra, D. (2015) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1007/s10618-014-0365-y · Cited by 1,504
Self-citationA comprehensive survey of numeric and symbolic outlier mining techniques
Agyemang, M., Barker, K., & Alhajj, R. (2006) · Intelligent Data Analysis · doi:10.3233/ida-2006-10604 · Cited by 164
Cited by
Progress in Outlier Detection Techniques: A Survey
Wang, H., Bah, M. J., & Hammad, M. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2932769 · Cited by 523
AddGraph: Anomaly Detection in Dynamic Graph Using Attention-based Temporal GCN
Zheng, L., Li, Z., Li, J., Li, Z., & Gao, J. (2019) · Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2019/614 · Cited by 268
Information cascades in complex networks
Jalili, M., & Perc, M. (2017) · Journal of Complex Networks · doi:10.1093/comnet/cnx019 · Cited by 248
Structural Temporal Graph Neural Networks for Anomaly Detection in Dynamic Graphs
Cai, L., Chen, Z., Luo, C., Gui, J., Ni, J., Li, D., & Chen, H. (2021) · Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management · doi:10.1145/3459637.3481955 · Cited by 146
Anomaly Detection using Graph Neural Networks
Chaudhary, A., Mittal, H., & Arora, A. (2019) · 2019 International Conference on Machine Learning, Big Data, Cloud and Parallel Computing (COMITCon) · doi:10.1109/comitcon.2019.8862186 · Cited by 106
Metadata
- Authors
- Ranshous, S., Shen, S., Koutra, D., Harenberg, S., Faloutsos, C., & Samatova, N. F.
- Venue
- WIREs Computational Statistics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-03-21
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 223-247
- ISSN
- 1939-0068 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-5108
- OpenAlex
- W2093168265
- Cited by
- 379
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 25.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Anomaly detection in dynamic networks: a survey. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/wics.1347
- The paper
- Ranshous, S., Shen, S., Koutra, D., Harenberg, S., Faloutsos, C., & Samatova, N. F. (2015). Anomaly detection in dynamic networks: a survey. WIREs Computational Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.1347
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.