CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 351Anomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning

CSI: Novelty Detection via Contrastive Learning on Distributionally Shifted Instances

Open access
Tack, Jihoon, Mo, Sangwoo, Jeong, Jongheon, Shin, Jinwoo·2020·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2007.08176arXiv 2007.08176
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Novelty detection, i.e., identifying whether a given sample is drawn from outside the training distribution, is essential for reliable machine learning. To this end, there have been many attempts at learning a representation well-suited for novelty detection and designing a score based on such representation. In this paper, we propose a simple, yet effective method named contrasting shifted instances (CSI), inspired by the recent success on contrastive learning of visual representations. Specifically, in addition to contrasting a given sample with other instances as in conventional contrastive learning methods, our training scheme contrasts the sample with distributionally-shifted augmentations of itself. Based on this, we propose a new detection score that is specific to the proposed training scheme. Our experiments demonstrate the superiority of our method under various novelty detection scenarios, including unlabeled one-class, unlabeled multi-class and labeled multi-class settings, with various image benchmark datasets. Code and pre-trained models are available at https://github.com/alinlab/CSI.

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2007.08176

Cites

11 of 11 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

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?

  • Using image rotations is effective in learning OOD detection models because rotations serve as OOD training data.

    “In [21] and [64], it was shown that using image rotations is effective in learning OOD detection models because such rotations can effectively serve as out-of-distribution (OOD) training data.”

    From Open-world continual learning: Unifying novelty detection and continual learning (2025) · cites this paper as [64]

    The Introduction (p. 2) says rotation is a distribution-shifting augmentation that can improve OOD detection by helping the model discriminate shifted samples from in-distribution samples. But the ablation study (p. 8) says this depends on the dataset: for rotation-invariant textures, rotation does not shift the distribution and worsens detection performance. The claim omits that condition. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • CSI can perform both within-task/IND prediction (WP) and OOD instance detection.

    “replaces their task learning methods with an OOD detection technique, called CSI [64], which can perform both within-task or IND prediction (WP) and OOD instance detection.”

    From Open-world continual learning: Unifying novelty detection and continual learning (2025) · cites this paper as [64]

  • CSI is based on contrastive learning, data and class augmentations, and results ensembling.

    “The OOD detection method CSI is based on contrastive learning [12, 29], data and class augmentations, and results ensembling [64].”

    From Open-world continual learning: Unifying novelty detection and continual learning (2025) · cites this paper as [64]

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: 58

  1. [1][1] D. Amodei, C. Olah, J. Steinhardt, P. Christiano, J. Schulman, and D. Mané. Concrete problems in ai safety. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.06565 , 2016. - · arXiv
  2. [2][2] L. Bergman and Y. Hoshen. Classification-based anomaly detection for general data. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2020. -
  3. [3][3] L. Bossard, M. Guillaumin, and L. Van Gool. Food-101-mining discriminative components with random forests. In European Conference on Computer Vision , 2014. -
  4. [5][5] T. Chen, S. Kornblith, M. Norouzi, and G. Hinton. A simple framework for contrastive learning of visual representations. In International Conference on Machine Learning , 2020. -
  5. [6][6] H. Choi, E. Jang, and A. A. Alemi. Waic, but why? generative ensembles for robust anomaly detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.01392 , 2018. - · arXiv
  6. [7][7] S. Choi and S.-Y. Chung. Novelty detection via blurring. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2020. -
  7. [9][9] L. Deecke, R. Vandermeulen, L. Ruff, S. Mandt, and M. Kloft. Image anomaly detection with generative adversarial networks. In Joint European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases , 2018. -
  8. [10][10] T. DeVries and G. W. Taylor. Improved regularization of convolutional neural networks with cutout. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.04552 , 2017. - · arXiv
  9. [11][11] Y. Du and I. Mordatch. Implicit generation and modeling with energy based models. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2019. -
  10. [12][12] K. Eykholt, I. Evtimov, E. Fernandes, B. Li, A. Rahmati, C. Xiao, A. Prakash, T. Kohno, and D. Song. Robust physical-world attacks on deep learning visual classification. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2018. -
  11. [13][13] W. Falcon and K. Cho. A framework for contrastive self-supervised learning and designing a new approach. arXiv preprint arXiv:2009.00104 , 2020. - · arXiv
  12. [14][14] S. Gidaris, P. Singh, and N. Komodakis. Unsupervised representation learning by predicting image rotations. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2018. -
  13. [15][15] I. Golan and R. El-Yaniv. Deep anomaly detection using geometric transformations. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2018. -
  14. [16][16] P. Goyal, P. Dollár, R. Girshick, P. Noordhuis, L. Wesolowski, A. Kyrola, A. Tulloch, Y. Jia, and K. He. Accurate, large minibatch sgd: Training imagenet in 1 hour. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.02677 , 2017. - · arXiv
  15. [17][17] W. Grathwohl, K.-C. Wang, J.-H. Jacobsen, D. Duvenaud, M. Norouzi, and K. Swersky. Your classifier is secretly an energy based model and you should treat it like one. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2020. -
  16. [21][21] K. He, H. Fan, Y. Wu, S. Xie, and R. Girshick. Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2020. -
  17. [22][22] D. Hendrycks and K. Gimpel. A baseline for detecting misclassified and out-of-distribution examples in neural networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2017. -
  18. [23][23] D. Hendrycks, K. Lee, and M. Mazeika. Using pre-training can improve model robustness and uncertainty. In International Conference on Machine Learning , 2019. -
  19. [24][24] D. Hendrycks, M. Mazeika, and T. Dietterich. Deep anomaly detection with outlier exposure. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2019. -
  20. [25][25] D. Hendrycks, M. Mazeika, S. Kadavath, and D. Song. Using self-supervised learning can improve model robustness and uncertainty. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2019. -
  21. [28][28] N. Kanopoulos, N. Vasanthavada, and R. L. Baker. Design of an image edge detection filter using the sobel operator. IEEE Journal of solid-state circuits , 1988. -
  22. [29][29] A. Khosla, N. Jayadevaprakash, B. Yao, and L. Fei-Fei. Novel dataset for fine-grained image categorization. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , Colorado Springs, CO, June 2011. -
  23. [30][30] P. Khosla, P. Teterwak, C. Wang, A. Sarna, Y. Tian, P. Isola, A. Maschinot, C. Liu, and D. Krishnan. Supervised contrastive learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2020. -
  24. [31][31] M. Kim, J. Tack, and S. J. Hwang. Adversarial self-supervised contrastive learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2020. -
  25. [32][32] A. Kolesnikov, X. Zhai, and L. Beyer. Revisiting self-supervised visual representation learning. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2019. -
  26. [34][34] C. Kruegel and G. Vigna. Anomaly detection of web-based attacks. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM conference on Computer and communications security , 2003. -
  27. [35][35] H. Lee, S. J. Hwang, and J. Shin. Self-supervised label augmentation via input transformations. In International Conference on Machine Learning , 2020. -
  28. [36][36] K. Lee, C. Hwang, K. S. Park, and J. Shin. Confident multiple choice learning. In International Conference on Machine Learning , 2017. -
  29. [37][37] K. Lee, H. Lee, K. Lee, and J. Shin. Training confidence-calibrated classifiers for detecting out-of-distribution samples. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2018. -
  30. [38][38] K. Lee, K. Lee, H. Lee, and J. Shin. A simple unified framework for detecting out-of-distribution samples and adversarial attacks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2018. -
  31. [39][39] S. Liang, Y. Li, and R. Srikant. Enhancing the reliability of out-of-distribution image detection in neural networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2018. -
  32. [40][40] H. Liu and P. Abbeel. Hybrid discriminative-generative training via contrastive learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2007.09070 , 2020. - · arXiv
  33. [41][41] I. Loshchilov and F. Hutter. Sgdr: Stochastic gradient descent with warm restarts. arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.03983 , 2016. - · arXiv
  34. [43][43] L. v. d. Maaten and G. Hinton. Visualizing data using t-sne. Journal of machine learning research , 2008. -
  35. [45][45] M. P. Naeini, G. Cooper, and M. Hauskrecht. Obtaining well calibrated probabilities using bayesian binning. In AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , 2015. -
  36. [46][46] E. Nalisnick, A. Matsukawa, Y. W. Teh, D. Gorur, and B. Lakshminarayanan. Do deep generative models know what they don't know? In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2019. -
  37. [47][47] E. Nalisnick, A. Matsukawa, Y. W. Teh, and B. Lakshminarayanan. Detecting out-of-distribution inputs to deep generative models using a test for typicality. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.02994 , 2019. - · arXiv
  38. [48][48] Y. Netzer, T. Wang, A. Coates, A. Bissacco, B. Wu, and A. Y. Ng. Reading digits in natural images with unsupervised feature learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems Workshop on Deep Learning and Unsupervised Feature Learning , 2011. -
  39. [49][49] M.-E. Nilsback and A. Zisserman. A visual vocabulary for flower classification. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2006. -
  40. [51][51] O. M. Parkhi, A. Vedaldi, A. Zisserman, and C. Jawahar. Cats and dogs. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2012. -
  41. [52][52] P. Perera, R. Nallapati, and B. Xiang. Ocgan: One-class novelty detection using gans with constrained latent representations. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2019. -
  42. [53][53] C. Phua, V. Lee, K. Smith, and R. Gayler. A comprehensive survey of data mining-based fraud detection research. arXiv preprint arXiv:1009.6119 , 2010. - · arXiv
  43. [55][55] J. Ren, P. J. Liu, E. Fertig, J. Snoek, R. Poplin, M. Depristo, J. Dillon, and B. Lakshminarayanan. Likelihood ratios for out-of-distribution detection. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2019. -
  44. [56][56] L. Ruff, R. Vandermeulen, N. Goernitz, L. Deecke, S. A. Siddiqui, A. Binder, E. Müller, and M. Kloft. Deep one-class classification. In International Conference on Machine Learning , 2018. -
  45. [57][57] L. Ruff, R. A. Vandermeulen, N. Görnitz, A. Binder, E. Müller, K.-R. Müller, and M. Kloft. Deep semi-supervised anomaly detection. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2020. -
  46. [58][58] T. Schlegl, P. Seeböck, S. M. Waldstein, U. Schmidt-Erfurth, and G. Langs. Unsupervised anomaly detection with generative adversarial networks to guide marker discovery. In International conference on information processing in medical imaging , 2017. -
  47. [59][59] B. Schölkopf, R. C. Williamson, A. J. Smola, J. Shawe-Taylor, and J. C. Platt. Support vector method for novelty detection. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2000. -
  48. [61][61] J. Serrà, D. Álvarez, V. Gómez, O. Slizovskaia, J. F. Núñez, and J. Luque. Input complexity and out-of-distribution detection with likelihood-based generative models. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2020. -
  49. [63][63] A. Srinivas, M. Laskin, and P. Abbeel. Curl: Contrastive unsupervised representations for reinforcement learning. In International Conference on Machine Learning , 2020. -
  50. [64][64] C. Szegedy, W. Liu, Y. Jia, P. Sermanet, S. Reed, D. Anguelov, D. Erhan, V. Vanhoucke, and A. Rabinovich. Going deeper with convolutions. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 1-9, 2015. -
  51. [65][65] J. B. Taylor and J. C. Williams. A black swan in the money market. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics , 2009. -
  52. [66][66] Y. Tian, C. Sun, B. Poole, D. Krishnan, C. Schmid, and P. Isola. What makes for good views for contrastive learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2020. -
  53. [68][68] J. Winkens, R. Bunel, A. G. Roy, R. Stanforth, V. Natarajan, J. R. Ledsam, P. MacWilliams, P. Kohli, A. Karthikesalingam, and S. Kohl. Contrastive training for improved out-of-distribution detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2007.05566 , 2020. - · arXiv
  54. [71][71] T. Xiao, X. Wang, A. A. Efros, and T. Darrell. What should not be contrastive in contrastive learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2008.05659 , 2020. - · arXiv
  55. [72][72] Y. You, I. Gitman, and B. Ginsburg. Large batch training of convolutional networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.03888 , 2017. - · arXiv
  56. [73][73] S. Yun, J. Park, K. Lee, and J. Shin. Regularizing class-wise predictions via self-knowledge distillation. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2020. -
  57. [75][75] B. Zhou, A. Lapedriza, A. Khosla, A. Oliva, and A. Torralba. Places: A 10 million image database for scene recognition. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , 2017. -
  58. [76][76] B. Zong, Q. Song, M. R. Min, W. Cheng, C. Lumezanu, D. Cho, and H. Chen. Deep autoencoding gaussian mixture model for unsupervised anomaly detection. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2018.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tack, J., Mo, S., Jeong, J., & Shin, J.
Affiliations
Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KR)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2020
Volume
33
Pages
11839-11852
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2007.08176
arXiv
2007.08176
OpenAlex
W3043138801
Cited by
351
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 76 · 2023: 96 · 2022: 66 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (2019-0-00075)
  • Ministry of Science and ICT, South Korea (2019-0-00075, No.2019-0-00075, 2017-0-01779)
  • Institute for Information and Communications Technology Promotion (2017‐0‐01779, No.2017-0-01779, 2019-0-00075)
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 › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Keywords
novelty detection, contrastive learning, distribution shift, out-of-distribution detection, self-augmentation, image classification

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