Cited by 99Anomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsSoftware System Performance and ReliabilityFault Detection and Control Systems

GRELEN: Multivariate Time Series Anomaly Detection from the Perspective of Graph Relational Learning

Open access
Zhang, Weiqi, Zhang, Chen, Tsung, Fugee·2022·Proceedings of the Thirty-First International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

System monitoring and anomaly detection is a crucial task in daily operation. With the rapid development of cyber-physical systems and IT systems, multiple sensors get involved to represent the system state from different perspectives, which inspires us to detect anomalies considering feature dependence relationship among sensors instead of focusing on individual sensor's behavior. In this paper, we propose a novel Graph Relational Learning Network (GReLeN) to detect multivariate time series anomalies from the perspective of between-sensor dependence relationship learning. Variational AutoEncoder (VAE) serves as the overall framework for feature extraction and system representation. Graph Neural Network (GNN) and stochastic graph relational learning strategy are also imposed to capture the between-sensor dependence. Then a composite anomaly metric is established with the learned dependence structure explicitly. The experiments on four real-world datasets show our superiority in detection accuracy, anomaly diagnosis, and model interpretation.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.24963/ijcai.2022/332

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Ahmed Abdulaal, Zhuanghua Liu, and Tomer Lancewicki. Practical approach to asyn- chronous multivariate time series anomaly detection and localization. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining, KDD '21, page 2485-2494, New York, NY, USA, 2021. Association for Computing Machinery.
  2. Ahmed et al., 2017] Chuadhry Mujeeb Ahmed, Venkata Reddy Palleti, and Aditya P Mathur. Wadi: a water distribution testbed for research in the design of secure cyber physical systems. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Cyber-Physical Systems for Smart Water Networks, pages 25-28, 2017.
  3. Julien Audibert, Pietro Michiardi, Frédéric Guyard, Sébastien Marti, and Maria A Zuluaga. Usad: Unsupervised anomaly detection on multivariate time series. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD In- ternational Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining, pages 3395-3404, 2020.
  4. Das et al., 2016] Shubhomoy Das, Weng-Keen Wong, Thomas Dietterich, Alan Fern, and Andrew Emmott. Incorporating expert feedback into active anomaly discov- ery. In 2016 IEEE 16th International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM), pages 853-858. IEEE, 2016.
  5. Deng and Hooi, 2021] Ailin Deng and Bryan Hooi. Graph neural network-based anomaly detection in multivariate time series. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Ar- tificial Intelligence, volume 35, pages 4027-4035, 2021.
  6. Eric Jang, Shixiang Gu, and Ben Poole. Categorical reparameterization with gumbel-softmax. In 5th International Conference on Learning Representa- tions, ICLR 2017, Toulon, France, April 24-26, 2017, Con- ference Track Proceedings. OpenReview.net, 2017.
  7. Thomas Kipf, Ethan Fetaya, Kuan-Chieh Wang, Max Welling, and Richard Zemel. Neural relational inference for interacting systems. In International Con- ference on Machine Learning, pages 2688-2697. PMLR, 2018.
  8. Li et al., 2018] Yaguang Li, Rose Yu, Cyrus Shahabi, and Yan Liu. Diffusion convolutional recurrent neural net- work: Data-driven traffic forecasting. In 6th Interna- tional Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2018, Vancouver, BC, Canada, April 30 -May 3, 2018, Conference Track Proceedings. OpenReview.net, 2018.
  9. Dan Li, Dacheng Chen, Baihong Jin, Lei Shi, Jonathan Goh, and See-Kiong Ng. Mad-gan: Mul- tivariate anomaly detection for time series data with gen- erative adversarial networks. In International Conference on Artificial Neural Networks, pages 703-716. Springer, 2019.
  10. Fei Tony Liu, Kai Ming Ting, and Zhi-Hua Zhou. Isolation forest. In 2008 eighth ieee international conference on data mining, pages 413-422. IEEE, 2008.
  11. Park et al., 2018] Daehyung Park, Yuuna Hoshi, and Charles C Kemp. A multimodal anomaly detector for robot-assisted feeding using an lstm-based variational autoencoder. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 3(3):1544-1551, 2018.
  12. Chao Shang, Jie Chen, and Jinbo Bi. Discrete graph structure learning for forecasting multiple time series. In International Conference on Learning Rep- resentations, 2020.
  13. Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need. In Advances in neural information processing sys- tems, pages 5998-6008, 2017.
  14. Wu et al., 2020] Zonghan Wu, Shirui Pan, Guodong Long, Jing Jiang, Xiaojun Chang, and Chengqi Zhang. Con- necting the dots: Multivariate time series forecasting with graph neural networks. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discov- ery & Data Mining, pages 753-763, 2020.
  15. Hang Zhao, Yujing Wang, Juanyong Duan, Congrui Huang, Defu Cao, Yunhai Tong, Bixiong Xu, Jing Bai, Jie Tong, and Qi Zhang. Multivariate time-series anomaly detection via graph attention network. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM), pages 841-850. IEEE, 2020.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhang, W., Zhang, C., & Tsung, F.
Affiliations
  • Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HK)
  • Tsinghua University (CN)
Venue
Proceedings of the Thirty-First International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Published
2022-07
Pages
2390-2397
OpenAlex
W4285600291
Cited by
99
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 1
FWCI
10.77
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (71901131, 16216119, 71932006)
  • Bulgarian National Science Fund (9222014)
  • Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Software System Performance and Reliability
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Fault Detection and Control Systems
Keywords
multivariate time series anomaly detection, system monitoring, variational autoencoder, graph neural networks, anomaly diagnosis, model interpretability, cyber-physical systems

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