Cited by 197Anomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection

Catching Both Gray and Black Swans: Open-set Supervised Anomaly Detection

Open access
Ding, Choubo, Pang, Guansong, Shen, Chunhua·2022·2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

Abstract

Despite most existing anomaly detection studies assume the availability of normal training samples only, a few labeled anomaly examples are often available in many real-world applications, such as defect samples identified during random quality inspection, lesion images confirmed by radiologists in daily medical screening, etc. These anomaly examples provide valuable knowledge about the application-specific abnormality, enabling significantly improved detection of similar anomalies in some recent models. However, those anomalies seen during training often do not illustrate every possible class of anomaly, rendering these models ineffective in generalizing to unseen anomaly classes. This paper tackles open-set supervised anomaly detection, in which we learn detection models using the anomaly examples with the objective to detect both seen anomalies (‘gray swans’) and unseen anomalies (‘black swans’). We propose a novel approach that learns disentangled representations of abnormalities illustrated by seen anomalies, pseudo anomalies, and latent residual anomalies (i.e., samples that have unusual residuals compared to the normal data in a latent space), with the last two abnormalities designed to detect unseen anomalies. Extensive experiments on nine real-world anomaly detection datasets show superior performance of our model in detecting seen and unseen anomalies under diverse settings. Code and data are available at: https://github.com/choubo/DRA

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr52688.2022.00724

Cites

73 of 73 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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 74 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ding, C., Pang, G., & Shen, C.
Affiliations
  • The University of Adelaide (AU)
  • Singapore Management University (SG)
  • Zhejiang University (CN)
Venue
2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2022-06
Pages
7378-7388
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4312289809
Cited by
197
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 43 · 2025: 66 · 2024: 58 · 2023: 30
FWCI
21.23
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)
  • Singapore Management University Institutional Knowledge (InK) (Singapore Management University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • 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 › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Keywords
supervised anomaly detection, black swan, disentangled representations, medical image anomaly detection, defect 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