A Survey of Anomaly Detection Methods Based on Clustering Analysis and Deep Learning
Main Article Content
Keywords
anomaly detection, clustering analysis, deep learning, deep clustering
Abstract
As information systems continuously expand, such as networks, the Internet of Things, and cloud computing, security and economic losses, as a consequence of anomalous events, have become increasingly prominent, and anomaly detection has become a fundamental competence for ensuring system reliability and security. High-dimensional, strongly nonlinear, and strongly temporally dependent data restrict the performance of anomaly detection methods based on a single technical route. Within this background, this research provides a formal description of anomaly detection and a classification of anomaly types, and categorizes time-series methods into six paradigms: clustering, prediction, reconstruction, representation learning, statistical, and hybrid. The paper expatiates on the anomaly discrimination mechanisms, parameter sensitivity, and complexity constraints of partitioning-, density-, and hierarchy-based clustering detection methods, as well as reconstruction-based and prediction-based detection frameworks based on autoencoders, long short-term memory networks, convolutional networks, Transformers, and generative adversarial networks, and then presents the objective functions and anomaly scoring forms of each method. A classification framework for fusion methods is constructed on the basis of three strategies: serial, parallel, and embedded. The findings show that combining the structural priors of clustering with the representation learning capability of deep models yields performance superior to that of a single method, however, the benefits are accompanied by increased model complexity and interpretation costs. In the meantime, four unresolved issues are identified: a unified fusion theory, adaptability to small samples and training set contamination, lightweight edge-side inference, and the construction of interpretable criteria.
References
- [1]Sayyaf, M. I., Pascacio, P., Zhu, N., et al. (2024). Time-series anomaly detection for sensor data: Models, metrics, and methodologies: A review. IEEE Sensors Journal, 24 (12), 19668–19688.
- [2]Ahmed, M., Mahmood, A. N., & Hu, J. (2016). A survey of network anomaly detection techniques. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 60, 19–31.
- [3]Pang, G., Shen, C., Cao, L., et al. (2021). Deep learning for anomaly detection: A review. ACM Computing Surveys, 54 (2), 1–38.
- [4]Chandola, V., Banerjee, A., & Kumar, V. (2009). Anomaly detection: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys, 41 (3), 1–58.
- [5]Ghasiabadian, M., Moosavi, Z., & Chow, T. W. S. (2023). Deep clustering: A survey. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 13 (1), e1485.
- [6]Campos, G. O., Zimek, A., Sander, J., et al. (2016). On the evaluation of unsupervised outlier detection: Measures, metrics, and empirical analysis. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 30 (6), 1541–1576.
- [7]Sabokrou, M., Rozantehder, A., Mohammadi, A., et al. (2022). Deep learning-based video anomaly detection: A survey. The Visual Computer, 38 (1), 337–364.
- [8]Aggarwal, C. C., & Yu, P. S. (2001). Outlier detection for high dimensional data. In Proceedings of the 2001 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (pp. 215–224). ACM.
- [9]Liu, F. T., Ting, K. M., & Zhou, Z. H. (2008). Isolation forest. In Proceedings of the 8th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (pp. 413–422). IEEE.
- [10]Olusoyi, K. P., Olugbein, R. A., Folorunso, O. A., et al. (2021). Anomaly detection for vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs). IEEE Access, 9, 102747–102767.
- [11]Chalapathy, R., & Chawla, S. (2015). Anomaly detection for IoT security using supervised learning approaches. In Machine Learning and Data Mining in Pattern Recognition (pp. 12–23). Springer.
- [12]He, Q., Li, N., & Luo, W. J. (2001). A survey on popular classification data mining algorithms. Journal of Computer Research and Development, 38 (11), 1376–1384.
- [13]Zhou, Z. H. (2016). Machine learning (pp. 1–10). Tsinghua University Press.
- [14]Ester, M., Kriegel, H. P., Sander, J., et al. (1996). A density-based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (pp. 226–231). AAAI Press.
- [15]Breunig, M. M., Kriegel, H. P., Ng, R. T., et al. (2000). LOF: Identifying density-based local outliers. In Proceedings of the 2000 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (pp. 93–104). ACM.
- [16]Kingma, D. P., & Welling, M. (2014). Auto-encoding variational Bayes. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Representations (pp. 1–14). ICLR.
- [17]Zong, B., Song, Q., Min, M. R., et al. (2018). Deep autoencoding Gaussian mixture model for unsupervised anomaly detection. In International Conference on Learning Representations (pp. 1–19). ICLR.
- [18]Hochreiter, S., & Schmidhuber, J. (1997). Long short-term memory. Neural Computation, 9 (8), 1735–1780.
- [19]Goodfellow, I., Poullot, J., Mirza, M., et al. (2014). Generative adversarial nets. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 27 (pp. 2672–2680). MIT Press.
- [20]Sharafaldeen, I., Belkadi, I., Alharidi, S., et al. (2021). Developing a real time intrusion detection system for Industry 4.0. Computers & Security, 101, 102017.
