![]() ![]() We have also listed the datasets used in various studies to detect group anomalies along with detected anomalies and the various performance measures used to validate the results. The graphical methodologies are then further classified under static versus dynamic and attributed versus plain graph methods. In this research, we bifurcated group anomaly detection techniques into activity-based and graph-based methods. ![]() The authors decided to survey existing group anomaly detection techniques because there is a need to consider group anomalies for mitigation of risks, prevention of malicious collaborative activities, and other interesting explanatory insights by identifying groups that are not consistent with regular group patterns. Anomaly detection is also a crucial problem in processing large-scale datasets when our goal is to find abnormal values or unusual events. Almost all existing anomaly detection techniques have some limitations and do not focus specifically on detecting anomalous groups. Īnomaly detection has evolved as a successful research subject in the areas such as bibliometrics, informatics and computer networks including security-based and social networks. and vertex scores Dynamic influence network (DIN-Viz) Community memberships Influence of rule-based models Periodic region detection (PRED) Community memberships periodic mobility patterns Grid-based subspace Graphical scores Locality for HD cases Netspot Scores of regions Scores of regions gSkeleton-Clu Community memberships Community structure GLAD model Community memberships Pair and point-wise data ASCOS Community memberships Similarity scores MultiAspect-forensics Scores of regions Pattern discovery in a heterogeneous network P-Rank p values Predictive p value Relational neighbor (RN) Graphical scores Class labels of related neighbors CBLOF Community memberships Anomalous community detection xStream Graphical scores Anomalies for feature evolving streams FIRST Graphical scores Attributed subgraph matching Streaming-POT Scores of regions Extreme value-theory One-class support measure machine (OCSMM) Scores of regions Anomalous behavior of data points Temporal clustering (TC) Community memberships Causal events Conditional and marginal AD tree Graphical scores Point anomalous records of 27 Communication Call data Node and edge detection. Likewise, the researcher used the database (10,344 articles and 10,579 authors) from the p values Predictive p value Scan statistics Scan statistics Scan stat. We evaluate our algorithms in a diverse set of real and synthetic networks, and we find solutions with higher score and better detection power for anomalous events compared to earlier heuristics. Our algorithm is able to extend to other variations of the HDS problem, such as the problem of finding multiple anomalous regions. In this paper, we develop a new approach for the HDS problem, which combines rigorous algorithmic and practical techniques and has much better scalability. As a result, they do not scale well to large instances. ![]() ![]() Prior methods for the HDS problem use the PCST solution as a heuristic, and run in time quadratic in the size of the graph. The HDS problem in a static graph is equivalent to the Prize Collecting Steiner Tree (PCST) problem with the Net-Worth objective-this is a very challenging problem, in general, and numerous heuristics have been proposed. The HDS in a time-evolving edge-weighted graph consists of a pair containing a subgraph and subinterval whose sum of edge weights is maximized. In this paper, we study an approach for identifying anomalous subgraphs based on the Heaviest Dynamic Subgraph (HDS) problem. Anomaly detection is a fundamental problem in dynamic networks. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |