Cited by 280Industrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning

Asymmetric Student-Teacher Networks for Industrial Anomaly Detection

Open access
Rudolph, Marco, Wehrbein, Tom, Rosenhahn, Bodo, Wandt, Bastian·2023·2023 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV)

Abstract

Industrial defect detection is commonly addressed with anomaly detection (AD) methods where no or only incomplete data of potentially occurring defects is available. This work discovers previously unknown problems of student-teacher approaches for AD and proposes a solution, where two neural networks are trained to produce the same output for the defect-free training examples. The core assumption of student-teacher networks is that the distance between the outputs of both networks is larger for anomalies since they are absent in training. However, previous methods suffer from the similarity of student and teacher architecture, such that the distance is undesirably small for anomalies. For this reason, we propose asymmetric student-teacher networks (AST). We train a normalizing flow for density estimation as a teacher and a conventional feed-forward network as a student to trigger large distances for anomalies: The bijectivity of the normalizing flow enforces a divergence of teacher outputs for anomalies compared to normal data. Outside the training distribution the student cannot imitate this divergence due to its fundamentally different architecture. Our AST network compensates for wrongly estimated likelihoods by a normalizing flow, which was alternatively used for anomaly detection in previous work. We show that our method produces state-of-the-art results on the two currently most relevant defect detection datasets MVTec AD and MVTec 3D-AD regarding image-level anomaly detection on RGB and 3D data.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/wacv56688.2023.00262

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.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 54 · Cited by 280

Authors
Rudolph, M., Wehrbein, T., Rosenhahn, B., & Wandt, B.
Affiliations
  • Leibniz University Hannover (DE)
  • Linköping University (SE)
Venue
2023 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2023-01
Pages
2591-2601
ISSN
2472-6737 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4319299981
Cited by
280
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 64 · 2025: 119 · 2024: 72 · 2023: 25
FWCI
121.88
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Ministry of Education
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Keywords
anomaly detection, industrial defect detection, student-teacher networks, normalizing flows, density estimation, likelihood estimation, 3D anomaly detection, MVTec AD

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