The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Higher-order Structure Based Anomaly Detection on Attributed Networks
Open accessAbstract
Anomaly detection (such as telecom fraud detection and medical image detection) has attracted the increasing attention of people. The complex interaction between multiple entities widely exists in the network, which can reflect specific human behavior patterns. Such patterns can be modeled by higher-order network structures, thus benefiting anomaly detection on attributed networks. However, due to the lack of an effective mechanism in most existing graph learning methods, these complex interaction patterns fail to be applied in detecting anomalies, hindering the progress of anomaly detection to some extent. In order to address the aforementioned issue, we present a higher-order structure based anomaly detection (GUIDE) method. We exploit attribute autoencoder and structure autoencoder to reconstruct node attributes and higher-order structures, respectively. Moreover, we design a graph attention layer to evaluate the significance of neighbors to nodes through their higher-order structure differences. Finally, we leverage node attribute and higher-order structure reconstruction errors to find anomalies. Extensive experiments on five real-world datasets (i.e., ACM, Citation, Cora, DBLP, and Pubmed) are implemented to verify the effectiveness of GUIDE. Experimental results in terms of ROC-AUC, PR-AUC, and Recall@K show that GUIDE significantly outperforms the state-of-art methods.
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.
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?
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Moreover, training on sensitive logs or network data raises privacy and compliance risks, especially when graph embeddings inadvertently encode identifiable or confidential information [38].”
From A Survey of Heterogeneous Graph Neural Networks for Cybersecurity Anomaly Detection (2025) · cites this paper as [38]
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.
Citations
Cites
Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization
Kingma, D. P., & Ba, J. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1412.6980 · Cited by 98,946
Liu, F. T., Ting, K. M., & Zhou, Z.-H. (2008) · 2008 Eighth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining · doi:10.1109/icdm.2008.17 · Cited by 6,601
Research works printed but not linked: 41
- 10.1145/342009.335388 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1109/ISI.2007.379473 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.298.5594.824 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/3442381.3449821 · DOI
- 10.1145/3340531.3417446 · DOI
- lee, 2019, Proceedings of ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, 499
- 10.1609/aaai.v33i01.330112 · DOI
- 10.1007/978-3-030-50417-5_22 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cosrev.2020.100267 · DOI
- 10.1145/3018661.3018731 · DOI
- 10.1145/2618243.2618266 · DOI
- 10.24963/ijcai.2017/299 · DOI
- 10.24963/ijcai.2018/488 · DOI
- 10.1109/ISCC50000.2020.9219684 · DOI
- 10.1145/3336191.3371788 · DOI
- 10.1137/1.9781611975673.67 · DOI
- 10.1145/3289600.3290964 · DOI
- 10.1109/IJCNN.2019.8852354 · DOI
- 10.1007/978-3-030-18590-9_19 · DOI
- 10.1137/1.9781611974348.24 · DOI
- 10.1109/ASONAM.2018.8508729 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.dss.2020.113303 · DOI
- 10.1145/3442381.3449849 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.asoc.2019.105895 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.future.2020.03.004 · DOI
- 10.1145/3184558.3186900 · DOI
- 10.1109/ISCC.2018.8538524 · DOI
- 10.1109/TCSS.2020.2977958 · DOI
- 10.3390/s18082491 · DOI
- 10.1109/MIS.2020.3042871 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICDM.2013.88 · DOI
- 10.1109/TAI.2021.3076021 · DOI
- 10.24963/ijcai.2017/325 · DOI
- li, 2019, Specae: Spectral autoencoder for anomaly detection in attributed networks, Proceedings of ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, 2233
- 10.1609/aaai.v34i01.5409 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICASSP40776.2020.9053387 · DOI
- 10.1145/3340531.3412070 · DOI
- kipf, 2016, Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional networks, ICLR International Conference on Learning Representations
- 10.24963/ijcai.2020/179 · DOI
- 10.1145/3184558.3191524 · DOI
- 10.1145/3383583.3398518 · DOI
Cited by
A Survey of Heterogeneous Graph Neural Networks for Cybersecurity Anomaly Detection
Jiang, L., Ryan, R., Li, Q., & Ferdosian, N. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.26307 · Cited by 13
“[ 37], [38], [39] Node, edge, and subgraph anomalies represent conceptually distinct categories, yet they frequently co-occur in real-world graphs.”
Metadata
- Authors
- Yuan, X., Zhou, N., Yu, S., Huang, H., Chen, Z., & Xia, F.
- Affiliations
- Dalian University of Technology (CN)
- Federation University (AU)
- Venue
- 2021 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2021-12-15
- Pages
- 2691-2700
- OpenAlex
- W4205942400
- Cited by
- 69
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 3.23
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData) (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- FedUni ResearchOnline (Federation University Australia) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Graph Neural Networks
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
- Keywords
- anomaly detection, attributed graphs, higher-order network structure, reconstruction error, node classification, telecom fraud detection
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
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.