Cited by 126Anomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsData Management and Algorithms

Statistical selection of relevant subspace projections for outlier ranking

Muller, Emmanuel, Schiffer, Matthias, Seidl, Thomas·2011·2011 IEEE 27th International Conference on Data Engineering

Abstract

Outlier mining is an important data analysis task to distinguish exceptional outliers from regular objects. For outlier mining in the full data space, there are well established methods which are successful in measuring the degree of deviation for outlier ranking. However, in recent applications traditional outlier mining approaches miss outliers as they are hidden in subspace projections. Especially, outlier ranking approaches measuring deviation on all available attributes miss outliers deviating from their local neighborhood only in subsets of the attributes. In this work, we propose a novel outlier ranking based on the objects deviation in a statistically selected set of relevant subspace projections. This ensures to find objects deviating in multiple relevant subspaces, while it excludes irrelevant projections showing no clear contrast between outliers and the residual objects. Thus, we tackle the general challenges of detecting outliers hidden in subspaces of the data. We provide a selection of subspaces with high contrast and propose a novel ranking based on an adaptive degree of deviation in arbitrary subspaces. In thorough experiments on real and synthetic data we show that our approach outperforms competing outlier ranking approaches by detecting outliers in arbitrary subspace projections.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icde.2011.5767916

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Combining exploratory data analysis tools with domain knowledge is helpful for extracting meaningful features, thereby improving the interpretability of subsequent anomaly detection.

    “For instance, Murdoch et al. [150] point out that combining exploratory data analysis tools with domain knowledge is helpful for extracting meaningful features, thereby improving the interpretability of subsequent anomaly detection.”

    From A Survey on Explainable Anomaly Detection (2024) · cites this paper as [150]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 31 · Cited by 126

Authors
Muller, E., Schiffer, M., & Seidl, T.
Affiliations
RWTH Aachen University (DE)
Venue
2011 IEEE 27th International Conference on Data Engineering
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2011-04
Pages
434-445
ISSN
1084-4627 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2097017789
Cited by
126
References
31
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 10
FWCI
7.01
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE) (publishedVersion)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Statistical Methods and Models
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Data Management and Algorithms
Keywords
subspace projection, outlier detection, deviation measurement

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