Cited by 41Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Anomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFault Detection and Control Systems

Explaining deep learning-based anomaly detection in energy consumption data by focusing on contextually relevant data

Open access
Noorchenarboo, Mohammad, Grolinger, Katarina·2025·Energy and Buildings

Abstract

Detecting anomalies in energy consumption data is crucial for identifying energy waste, equipment malfunction, and overall, for ensuring efficient energy management. Machine learning, and specifically deep learning approaches, have been greatly successful in anomaly detection; however, they are black-box approaches that do not provide transparency or explanations. SHAP and its variants have been proposed to explain these models, but they suffer from high computational complexity (SHAP) or instability and inconsistency (e.g., Kernel SHAP). To address these challenges, this paper proposes an explainability approach for anomalies in energy consumption data that focuses on context-relevant information. The proposed approach leverages existing explainability techniques, focusing on SHAP variants, together with global feature importance and weighted cosine similarity to select background dataset based on the context of each anomaly point. By focusing on the context and most relevant features, this approach mitigates the instability of explainability algorithms. Experimental results across 10 different machine learning models, five datasets, and five XAI techniques, demonstrate that our method reduces the variability of explanations providing consistent explanations. Statistical analyses confirm the robustness of our approach, showing an average reduction in variability of approximately 38\% across multiple datasets.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.enbuild.2024.115177

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 60 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Noorchenarboo, M., & Grolinger, K.
Affiliations
Western University (CA)
Corresponding author
Grolinger, Katarina
Venue
Energy and Buildings
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-02
Volume
328
Pages
115177
ISSN
0378-7788 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4405363817
Cited by
38
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 14
FWCI
5.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Energy and Buildings (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Scholarship@Western (Western University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Scholarship@Western (Western University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Alliance de recherche numérique du Canada
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (ALLRP 571890 - 21)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Fault Detection and Control Systems
Keywords
anomaly detection, energy consumption data, explainable AI, SHAP, KernelSHAP, feature importance, weighted cosine similarity, energy management, black-box models

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