DIFFINT is a reconstruction‑based anomaly detector that uses a differentiable autoencoder with a latent bottleneck composed of soft, axis‑aligned interval memberships. Each latent unit represents a human‑readable hyper‑rectangle in feature space, allowing the model to encode how strongly an instance falls inside each interval and to compute reconstruction error as the anomaly score. The method provides a certified lower bound on reconstruction error for points outside all active intervals, a suppression mechanism for sparse abnormalities, and a closed‑form, label‑free importance ranking for each (unit, feature) pair, achieving top performance on 48 ADBench benchmarks against 22 baselines.
By Lamine Diop, Marc Plantevit
DIFFINT is a reconstruction‑based anomaly detector that replaces the opaque latent bottleneck of a standard autoencoder with a set of soft, axis‑aligned interval memberships learned directly from raw numerical data. Each latent unit represents a human‑readable hyper‑rectangle, and an instance’s anomaly score is its reconstruction error weighted by how strongly it falls inside these intervals. The method provides a certified lower bound on reconstruction error for points outside all active intervals, a graded suppression mechanism for sparse anomalies, and a closed‑form, label‑free importance ranking for each (unit, feature) pair, achieving top performance on 48 ADBench benchmarks against 22 baselines.
whyItMatters":"DIFFINT offers the first interpretable anomaly detector that maintains competitive performance while revealing which feature ranges drive each anomaly score, enabling practitioners to audit and understand model decisions without requiring anomaly labels."
Memory-based anomaly detection is attractive because it localizes defects from normal images without training a decoder or synthesizing pseudo anomalies. However, most memory methods still use the memory bank as a nearest-neighbor lookup table: a test patch is treated as normal if it has one nearby normal anchor.
arXiv:2609.14690v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Onboard satellites must restore a channel-degraded image on a few watts, using neuromorphic accelerators (e.g., BrainChip Akida, Intel Loihi-2) that su...
By Thanh-Dung Le, Vu Nguyen Ha, Ti Ti Nguyen, Symeon Chatzinotas
arXiv:2607.18451v3 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: A foundation encoder is pretrained once on a large image corpus and then reused with its weights frozen. Each new task is solved by training a smal...
By Soroosh Tayebi Arasteh, Sven Nebelung, Daniel Truhn
arXiv:2608. 16725v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Corrupted, inconsistent, or anomalous data silently threatens the safety and reliability of medical AI.
By Chiara Tappermann, Steffen Renisch, Lars Ole Schwen, Hans Meine, Horst K. Hahn, Eike Petersen
arXiv:2607. 13234v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Deepfake detectors that achieve near-perfect scores on academic benchmarks collapse on real-world content: recent in-the-wild evaluations report AUC drops of 45-50% for state-of-the-art open-source models.
By Ken Jon Miyachi, Dylan Uys
The paper studies a class of tabular anomaly detectors that train a neural map toward a fixed target using squared‑error loss, noting that improved optimization can paradoxically worsen detection performance—a phenomenon termed convergence collapse. It demonstrates that this collapse arises because the learned map extrapolates beyond the training data, erasing residual signals on anomalies. To address this, the authors introduce Kernel Contraction Matching (KCM), a closed‑form, training‑free kernel‑based baseline, and propose the Kernel‑Anchored Regularizer (KAR), which penalizes deviations from a kernel‑weighted average of training targets, thereby mitigating collapse and improving AUROC during extended training.
By Jos\'e Lucas De Melo Costa, Fabrice Popineau, Arpad Rimmel, Bich-Li\^en Doan
arXiv:2609.01027v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Out-of-distribution (OOD) detection predicts whether a test image belongs to none of the predefined classes. To evaluate this task, benchmarks need ima...
By Ruslan Rozumnyi, Mat\v{e}j Such\'anek, Tom\'a\v{s} Voj\'i\v{r}, Kl\'ara Janou\v{s}kov\'a, Ji\v{r}\'i Matas
arXiv:2606. 04857v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Standard IMVC evaluation retrains separate models for different missing-data configurations.
By Haolu Liu, Xiyue Wang, Xuanting Xie, Liangjian Wen, Zhao Kang
arXiv:2603. 26842v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Time series anomaly detection (TSAD) is essential for maintaining the reliability and security of IoT-enabled service systems.
By PengYu Chen, Shang Wan, Xiaohou Shi, Yuan Chang, Yan Sun, Sajal K. Das
The study evaluates 16 AI‑generated image detection methods in a zero‑shot setting, testing 23 pretrained variants on 12 datasets with 2.6 million images from 291 generators. Results show no single detector consistently outperforms others, with accuracy ranging from 37.5 % to 75.0 %. The study highlights that training data alignment and generator type significantly affect performance, especially against modern commercial models, and identifies systematic failure patterns across datasets.
By Simiao Ren (Neo), Yuchen Zhou (Neo), Xingyu Shen (Neo), Kidus Zewde (Neo), Tommy Duong (Neo), George Huang (Neo), Hatsanai (Neo), Tiangratanakul (Dennis), Tsang (Dennis), Ng (Dennis), En Wei, Jiayu Xue