The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Conditional Anomaly Detection
Abstract
When anomaly detection software is used as a data analysis tool, finding the hardest-to-detect anomalies is not the most critical task. Rather, it is often more important to make sure that those anomalies that are reported to the user are in fact interesting. If too many unremarkable data points are returned to the user labeled as candidate anomalies, the software can soon fall into disuse. One way to ensure that returned anomalies are useful is to make use of domain knowledge provided by the user. Often, the data in question includes a set of environmental attributes whose values a user would never consider to be directly indicative of an anomaly. However, such attributes cannot be ignored because they have a direct effect on the expected distribution of the result attributes whose values can indicate an anomalous observation. This paper describes a general purpose method called conditional anomaly detection for taking such differences among attributes into account, and proposes three different expectation-maximization algorithms for learning the model that is used in conditional anomaly detection. Experiments with more than 13 different data sets compare our algorithms with several other more standard methods for outlier or anomaly detection
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.
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
LOF: identifying density-based local outliers
Breunig, M. M., Kriegel, H.-P., Ng, R. T., & Sander, J. (2000) · ACM SIGMOD Record · doi:10.1145/335191.335388 · Cited by 5,207
When Is ''Nearest Neighbor'' Meaningful?
Beyer, K., Goldstein, J., Ramakrishnan, R., & Shaft, U. (1999) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/3-540-49257-7_15 · Cited by 2,403
Distance-based outliers: algorithms and applications
Knorr, E. M., Ng, R. T., & Tucakov, V. (2000) · The VLDB Journal The International Journal on Very Large Data Bases · doi:10.1007/s007780050006 · Cited by 1,195
Efficient algorithms for mining outliers from large data sets
Ramaswamy, S., Rastogi, R., & Shim, K. (2000) · Proceedings of the 2000 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data · doi:10.1145/342009.335437 · Cited by 1,171
Cited by
Chandola, V., Banerjee, A., & Kumar, V. (2009) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/1541880.1541882 · Cited by 11,687
Pimentel, M. A. F., Clifton, D. A., Clifton, L., & Tarassenko, L. (2014) · Signal Processing · doi:10.1016/j.sigpro.2013.12.026 · Cited by 1,649
Deep Learning for Anomaly Detection: A Survey
Chalapathy, R., & Chawla, S. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1901.03407 · Cited by 1,240
Machine Learning for Anomaly Detection: A Systematic Review
Nassif, A. B., Talib, M. A., Nasir, Q., & Dakalbab, F. M. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3083060 · Cited by 748
Contextual anomaly detection framework for big sensor data
Hayes, M. A., & Capretz, M. A. (2015) · Journal of Big Data · doi:10.1186/s40537-014-0011-y · Cited by 149
Metadata
- Authors
- Song, X., Wu, M., Jermaine, C., & Ranka, S.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering
- Published
- 2007-05
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 631-645
- ISSN
- 1041-4347 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2134255060
- Cited by
- 374
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 7.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Conditional Anomaly Detection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tkde.2007.1009
- The paper
- Song, X., Wu, M., Jermaine, C., & Ranka, S. (2007). Conditional Anomaly Detection. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/tkde.2007.1009
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.