FRaC: a feature-modeling approach for semi-supervised and unsupervised anomaly detection
Open accessAbstract
Anomaly detection involves identifying rare data instances (anomalies) that come from a different class or distribution than the majority (which are simply called "normal" instances). Given a training set of only normal data, the semi-supervised anomaly detection task is to identify anomalies in the future. Good solutions to this task have applications in fraud and intrusion detection. The unsupervised anomaly detection task is different: Given unlabeled, mostly-normal data, identify the anomalies among them. Many real-world machine learning tasks, including many fraud and intrusion detection tasks, are unsupervised because it is impractical (or impossible) to verify all of the training data. We recently presented FRaC, a new approach for semi-supervised anomaly detection. FRaC is based on using normal instances to build an ensemble of feature models, and then identifying instances that disagree with those models as anomalous. In this paper, we investigate the behavior of FRaC experimentally and explain why FRaC is so successful. We also show that FRaC is a superior approach for the unsupervised as well as the semi-supervised anomaly detection task, compared to well-known state-of-the-art anomaly detection methods, LOF and one-class support vector machines, and to an existing feature-modeling approach.
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
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
XAD aims to provide accurate anomaly detection results and tangible explanations of why a specific object is detected as an anomaly.
“For this reason, XAD aims to not only provide accurate anomaly detection results but also to provide tangible explanations of why a specific object is detected as an anomaly [155].”
From A Survey on Explainable Anomaly Detection (2024) · cites this paper as [155]
Section 1.2 describes FRaC’s anomaly scores, and Section 3.4 gives feature-level reasons why particular instances are identified as anomalous. The paper does not discuss XAD or establish that XAD aims to provide both accurate results and tangible explanations. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 24 · Cited by 79
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Mitchell T 1997 Machine learning McGraw-Hill New York
- Smith R Bivens A Embrechts M Palagiri C Szymanski B 2002 Clustering approaches for anomaly based intrusion detection Proceedings of intelligent engineering systems through artificial neural networks 579 584
- Authors
- Noto, K., Brodley, C., & Slonim, D.
- Affiliations
- Tufts University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Noto, Keith
- Venue
- Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery
- Published
- 2011-09-08
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 109-133
- ISSN
- 1384-5810 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-756X
- PMC
- PMC3359096
- OpenAlex
- W2010921848
- Cited by
- 79
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 3.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- National Institutes of Health
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD058880)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Imbalanced Data Classification Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
- Keywords
- anomaly detection, semi-supervised anomaly detection, unsupervised anomaly detection, feature modeling, fraud detection, intrusion detection, LOF, one-class support vector machine
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