Cited by 608Anomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis

OCGAN: One-Class Novelty Detection Using GANs With Constrained Latent Representations

Open access
Perera, Pramuditha, Nallapati, Ramesh, Xiang, Bing·2019·2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

Abstract

We present a novel model called OCGAN for the classical problem of one-class novelty detection, where, given a set of examples from a particular class, the goal is to determine if a query example is from the same class. Our solution is based on learning latent representations of in-class examples using a de-noising auto-encoder network. The key contribution of our work is our proposal to explicitly constrain the latent space to exclusively represent the given class. In order to accomplish this goal, firstly, we force the latent space to have bounded support by introducing a tanh activation in the encoder's output layer. Secondly, using a discriminator in the latent space that is trained adversarially, we ensure that encoded representations of in-class examples resemble uniform random samples drawn from the same bounded space. Thirdly, using a second adversarial discriminator in the input space, we ensure all randomly drawn latent samples generate examples that look real. Finally, we introduce a gradient-descent based sampling technique that explores points in the latent space that generate potential out-of-class examples, which are fed back to the network to further train it to generate in-class examples from those points. The effectiveness of the proposed method is measured across four publicly available datasets using two one-class novelty detection protocols where we achieve state-of-the-art results.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr.2019.00301

Cites

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?

  • Reconstruction-based methods have limited performance in capturing small localized anomalies.

    “Reconstruction based methods are very intuitive and explainable, but their performance is limited when it comes to capture small localized anomalies[21].”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 31 · Cited by 608

Authors
Perera, P., Nallapati, R., & Xiang, B.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Amazon (United States) (US)
Venue
2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2019-06
Pages
2893-2901
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2963049059
Cited by
608
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 62 · 2024: 104 · 2023: 111 · 2022: 88 · 2021: 138 · 2020: 68 · 2019: 10
FWCI
29.08
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Keywords
generative adversarial networks, gradient-based sampling, anomaly 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