Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
144 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Omni-frequency Channel-selection Representations for Unsupervised Anomaly Detection (2203.00259v2)

Published 1 Mar 2022 in cs.CV

Abstract: Density-based and classification-based methods have ruled unsupervised anomaly detection in recent years, while reconstruction-based methods are rarely mentioned for the poor reconstruction ability and low performance. However, the latter requires no costly extra training samples for the unsupervised training that is more practical, so this paper focuses on improving this kind of method and proposes a novel Omni-frequency Channel-selection Reconstruction (OCR-GAN) network to handle anomaly detection task in a perspective of frequency. Concretely, we propose a Frequency Decoupling (FD) module to decouple the input image into different frequency components and model the reconstruction process as a combination of parallel omni-frequency image restorations, as we observe a significant difference in the frequency distribution of normal and abnormal images. Given the correlation among multiple frequencies, we further propose a Channel Selection (CS) module that performs frequency interaction among different encoders by adaptively selecting different channels. Abundant experiments demonstrate the effectiveness and superiority of our approach over different kinds of methods, e.g., achieving a new state-of-the-art 98.3 detection AUC on the MVTec AD dataset without extra training data that markedly surpasses the reconstruction-based baseline by +38.1 and the current SOTA method by +0.3. Source code is available at https://github.com/zhangzjn/OCR-GAN.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (68)
  1. M.-E. Nilsback and A. Zisserman, “Automated flower classification over a large number of classes,” in 2008 Sixth Indian Conference on Computer Vision, Graphics & Image Processing.   IEEE, 2008, pp. 722–729.
  2. P. Bergmann, M. Fauser, D. Sattlegger, and C. Steger, “Mvtec ad–a comprehensive real-world dataset for unsupervised anomaly detection,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2019, pp. 9592–9600.
  3. X. Wang and M. Mirmehdi, “Archive film defect detection and removal: an automatic restoration framework,” IEEE transactions on image processing, vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 3757–3769, 2012.
  4. Z. Li, C. Wang, M. Han, Y. Xue, W. Wei, L.-J. Li, and L. Fei-Fei, “Thoracic disease identification and localization with limited supervision,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2018, pp. 8290–8299.
  5. Y. Liu, C.-L. Li, and B. Póczos, “Classifier two sample test for video anomaly detections.” in British Machine Vision Conference 2018, BMVC 2018, Newcastle, UK, September 3-6, 2018, 2018, p. 71.
  6. W. Sultani, C. Chen, and M. Shah, “Real-world anomaly detection in surveillance videos,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2018, pp. 6479–6488.
  7. H. Lv, C. Zhou, Z. Cui, C. Xu, Y. Li, and J. Yang, “Localizing anomalies from weakly-labeled videos,” IEEE transactions on image processing, vol. 30, pp. 4505–4515, 2021.
  8. E. Jardim, L. A. Thomaz, E. A. da Silva, and S. L. Netto, “Domain-transformable sparse representation for anomaly detection in moving-camera videos,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 29, pp. 1329–1343, 2019.
  9. J. Yang, K. Zhou, Y. Li, and Z. Liu, “Generalized out-of-distribution detection: A survey,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.11334, 2021.
  10. D. Tabernik, S. Šela, J. Skvarč, and D. Skočaj, “Segmentation-Based Deep-Learning Approach for Surface-Defect Detection,” Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, May 2019.
  11. A. Krizhevsky, G. Hinton et al., “Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images,” 2009.
  12. N. Cohen and Y. Hoshen, “Sub-image anomaly detection with deep pyramid correspondences,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.02357, 2020.
  13. J. Yi and S. Yoon, “Patch svdd: Patch-level svdd for anomaly detection and segmentation,” in Proceedings of the Asian Conference on Computer Vision, 2020.
  14. T. Defard, A. Setkov, A. Loesch, and R. Audigier, “Padim: A patch distribution modeling framework for anomaly detection and localization,” in International Conference on Pattern Recognition.   Springer, 2021, pp. 475–489.
  15. C.-L. Li, K. Sohn, J. Yoon, and T. Pfister, “Cutpaste: Self-supervised learning for anomaly detection and localization,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2021, pp. 9664–9674.
  16. M. Ravanbakhsh, M. Nabi, E. Sangineto, L. Marcenaro, C. Regazzoni, and N. Sebe, “Abnormal event detection in videos using generative adversarial nets,” in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP).   IEEE, 2017, pp. 1577–1581.
  17. T.-N. Nguyen and J. Meunier, “Anomaly detection in video sequence with appearance-motion correspondence,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2019, pp. 1273–1283.
  18. X. Xia, X. Pan, X. He, J. Zhang, N. Ding, and L. Ma, “Discriminative-generative representation learning for one-class anomaly detection,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.12753, 2021.
  19. B. Hu, B. Gao, W. L. Woo, L. Ruan, J. Jin, Y. Yang, and Y. Yu, “A lightweight spatial and temporal multi-feature fusion network for defect detection,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 30, pp. 472–486, 2020.
  20. V. Zavrtanik, M. Kristan, and D. Skočaj, “Draem-a discriminatively trained reconstruction embedding for surface anomaly detection,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2021, pp. 8330–8339.
  21. X. Li, X. Jin, T. Yu, S. Sun, Y. Pang, Z. Zhang, and Z. Chen, “Learning omni-frequency region-adaptive representations for real image super-resolution,” in Thirty-Fifth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2021, Thirty-Third Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, IAAI 2021, The Eleventh Symposium on Educational Advances in Artificial Intelligence, EAAI 2021, Virtual Event, February 2-9, 2021, vol. 35, no. 3, 2021, pp. 1975–1983.
  22. S. Akçay, A. Atapour-Abarghouei, and T. P. Breckon, “Skip-ganomaly: Skip connected and adversarially trained encoder-decoder anomaly detection,” in 2019 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN).   IEEE, 2019, pp. 1–8.
  23. J. Andrews, T. Tanay, E. J. Morton, and L. D. Griffin, “Transfer representation-learning for anomaly detection.”   JMLR, 2016.
  24. T. S. Nazare, R. F. de Mello, and M. A. Ponti, “Are pre-trained cnns good feature extractors for anomaly detection in surveillance videos?” arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.08495, 2018.
  25. L. Bergman and Y. Hoshen, “Classification-based anomaly detection for general data,” in International Conference on Learning Representations, 2019.
  26. O. Rippel, P. Mertens, and D. Merhof, “Modeling the distribution of normal data in pre-trained deep features for anomaly detection,” in 2020 25th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR).   IEEE, 2021, pp. 6726–6733.
  27. J. Yang, Y. Shi, and Z. Qi, “Dfr: Deep feature reconstruction for unsupervised anomaly segmentation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2012.07122, 2020.
  28. Z. Zeng, B. Liu, J. Fu, and H. Chao, “Reference-based defect detection network,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 30, pp. 6637–6647, 2021.
  29. T. Zhang, A. Wiliem, and B. C. Lovell, “Region-based anomaly localisation in crowded scenes via trajectory analysis and path prediction,” in 2013 International Conference on Digital Image Computing: Techniques and Applications (DICTA).   IEEE, 2013, pp. 1–7.
  30. P. Bergmann, M. Fauser, D. Sattlegger, and C. Steger, “Uninformed students: Student-teacher anomaly detection with discriminative latent embeddings,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2020, pp. 4183–4192.
  31. Y. Chen, Y. Tian, G. Pang, and G. Carneiro, “Unsupervised anomaly detection with multi-scale interpolated gaussian descriptors,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.10043, 2021.
  32. E. Eskin, “Anomaly detection over noisy data using learned probability distributions,” 2000.
  33. R. A. Redner and H. F. Walker, “Mixture densities, maximum likelihood and the em algorithm,” SIAM review, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 195–239, 1984.
  34. M. Turcotte, J. Moore, N. Heard, and A. McPhall, “Poisson factorization for peer-based anomaly detection,” in 2016 IEEE Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics (ISI).   IEEE, 2016, pp. 208–210.
  35. 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.   PMLR, 2018, pp. 4393–4402.
  36. L. Bergman, N. Cohen, and Y. Hoshen, “Deep nearest neighbor anomaly detection,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2002.10445, 2020.
  37. Y. Chen, X. S. Zhou, and T. S. Huang, “One-class svm for learning in image retrieval,” in Proceedings 2001 International Conference on Image Processing (Cat. No. 01CH37205), vol. 1.   IEEE, 2001, pp. 34–37.
  38. M. Sabokrou, M. Fayyaz, M. Fathy, Z. Moayed, and R. Klette, “Deep-anomaly: Fully convolutional neural network for fast anomaly detection in crowded scenes,” Computer Vision and Image Understanding, vol. 172, pp. 88–97, 2018.
  39. K. Roth, L. Pemula, J. Zepeda, B. Schölkopf, T. Brox, and P. Gehler, “Towards total recall in industrial anomaly detection,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 14 318–14 328.
  40. M. Rudolph, B. Wandt, and B. Rosenhahn, “Same same but differnet: Semi-supervised defect detection with normalizing flows,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, 2021, pp. 1907–1916.
  41. F. Ju, Y. Sun, J. Gao, Y. Hu, and B. Yin, “Image outlier detection and feature extraction via l1-norm-based 2d probabilistic pca,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 4834–4846, 2015.
  42. F. T. Liu, K. M. Ting, and Z.-H. Zhou, “Isolation forest,” in 2008 eighth ieee international conference on data mining.   IEEE, 2008, pp. 413–422.
  43. I. Golan and R. El-Yaniv, “Deep anomaly detection using geometric transformations,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 31, 2018.
  44. J. Tack, S. Mo, J. Jeong, and J. Shin, “Csi: Novelty detection via contrastive learning on distributionally shifted instances,” in 34th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) 2020.   Neural Information Processing Systems, 2020.
  45. Y. Xiao, H. Wang, W. Xu, and J. Zhou, “L1 norm based kpca for novelty detection,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 389–396, 2013.
  46. K. Jiang, W. Xie, J. Lei, T. Jiang, and Y. Li, “Lren: Low-rank embedded network for sample-free hyperspectral anomaly detection,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 35, no. 5, 2021, pp. 4139–4146.
  47. D. P. Kingma and M. Welling, “Auto-encoding variational bayes,” stat, vol. 1050, p. 1, 2014.
  48. I. Goodfellow, J. Pouget-Abadie, M. Mirza, B. Xu, D. Warde-Farley, S. Ozair, A. Courville, and Y. Bengio, “Generative adversarial nets,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 27, 2014.
  49. P. Bergmann, S. Löwe, M. Fauser, D. Sattlegger, and C. Steger, “Improving unsupervised defect segmentation by applying structural similarity to autoencoders,” in Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Computer Graphics Theory and Applications, VISIGRAPP 2019, Volume 5: VISAPP, Prague, Czech Republic, February 25-27, 2019, 2019.
  50. D. Pathak, P. Krahenbuhl, J. Donahue, T. Darrell, and A. A. Efros, “Context encoders: Feature learning by inpainting,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2016, pp. 2536–2544.
  51. M. Sabokrou, M. Khalooei, M. Fathy, and E. Adeli, “Adversarially learned one-class classifier for novelty detection,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2018, pp. 3379–3388.
  52. S. Akcay, A. Atapour-Abarghouei, and T. P. Breckon, “Ganomaly: Semi-supervised anomaly detection via adversarial training,” in Asian conference on computer vision.   Springer, 2018, pp. 622–637.
  53. D. Abati, A. Porrello, S. Calderara, and R. Cucchiara, “Latent space autoregression for novelty detection,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2019, pp. 481–490.
  54. P. Perera, R. Nallapati, and B. Xiang, “Ocgan: One-class novelty detection using gans with constrained latent representations,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2019, pp. 2898–2906.
  55. M. Z. Zaheer, J.-h. Lee, M. Astrid, and S.-I. Lee, “Old is gold: Redefining the adversarially learned one-class classifier training paradigm,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2020, pp. 14 183–14 193.
  56. G. Kwon, M. Prabhushankar, D. Temel, and G. AlRegib, “Backpropagated gradient representations for anomaly detection,” in European Conference on Computer Vision.   Springer, 2020, pp. 206–226.
  57. X. Han, X. Chen, and L.-P. Liu, “Gan ensemble for anomaly detection,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 35, no. 5, 2021, pp. 4090–4097.
  58. X. Li, W. Wang, X. Hu, and J. Yang, “Selective kernel networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2019, pp. 510–519.
  59. T. DeVries and G. W. Taylor, “Improved regularization of convolutional neural networks with cutout,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.04552, 2017.
  60. 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.   Springer, 2017, pp. 146–157.
  61. M. Wieler and T. Hahn, “Weakly supervised learning for industrial optical inspection,” in DAGM symposium in, 2007.
  62. M. Salehi, A. Eftekhar, N. Sadjadi, M. H. Rohban, and H. R. Rabiee, “Puzzle-ae: Novelty detection in images through solving puzzles,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2008.12959, 2020.
  63. J. Pirnay and K. Chai, “Inpainting transformer for anomaly detection,” in Image Analysis and Processing–ICIAP 2022: 21st International Conference, Lecce, Italy, May 23–27, 2022, Proceedings, Part II.   Springer, 2022, pp. 394–406.
  64. Z. Lin, H. Ye, B. Zhan, and X. Huang, “An efficient network for surface defect detection,” Applied Sciences, vol. 10, no. 17, p. 6085, 2020.
  65. J. Božič, D. Tabernik, and D. Skočaj, “End-to-end training of a two-stage neural network for defect detection,” in 2020 25th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR).   IEEE, 2021, pp. 5619–5626.
  66. A. Paszke, S. Gross, F. Massa, A. Lerer, J. Bradbury, G. Chanan, T. Killeen, Z. Lin, N. Gimelshein, L. Antiga et al., “Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning library,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 32, pp. 8026–8037, 2019.
  67. D. P. Kingma and J. Ba, “Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,” in ICLR (Poster), 2015.
  68. P. Perera and V. M. Patel, “Learning deep features for one-class classification,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 28, no. 11, pp. 5450–5463, 2019.
Citations (88)

Summary

  • The paper introduces the OCR-GAN network that decouples omni-frequency channels to boost reconstruction-based anomaly detection.
  • The method employs frequency decoupling and adaptive channel selection, enabling superior performance with no extra training data.
  • Results show that OCR-GAN achieves a 98.3 AUC on MVTec AD, marking a significant advance over existing techniques.

Omni-frequency Channel-selection Representations for Unsupervised Anomaly Detection

The paper "Omni-frequency Channel-selection Representations for Unsupervised Anomaly Detection" presents a novel approach named Omni-frequency Channel-selection Reconstruction (OCR-GAN) network. This method aims to improve the unsupervised anomaly detection task, specifically focusing on the reconstruction-based technique. This approach is crucial due to its ability to operate without the need for costly extra training samples, positioning it as a practical solution in various real-world applications.

Reconstruction-based Anomaly Detection

Most existing unsupervised anomaly detection techniques work on either density-based or classification-based methods, which usually deliver high performance but require pre-trained models and additional training data, thus becoming less practical. Traditionally, reconstruction-based methods have underachieved due to their poor reconstruction capability. However, these methods offer an advantage by needing no extra data. The paper targets the reconstruction-based approach and proposes the OCR-GAN network to significantly enhance performance within this framework.

Omni-frequency Channel-selection Mechanism

The core innovation in OCR-GAN comes from the introduction of frequency domain analysis and interaction among different frequency channels. The method leverages the difference in frequency distribution between normal and abnormal sensory images. This difference is crucial since normal and abnormal images have distinctive frequency signatures, which the OCR-GAN exploits for improved detection.

Frequency Decoupling (FD) Module

The FD module decomposes an image into multiple frequency components, allowing parallel reconstruction of omni-frequency images. This decomposition is based on the observation that different frequencies encapsulate varied types of information (e.g., texture at high frequencies, semantics at low frequencies). By enabling separate frequency-wise reconstruction, the model can better focus on the details that differentiate normal from abnormal conditions.

Channel Selection (CS) Module

To further enhance the interaction among these distinct frequency branches, a CS module is introduced, promoting adaptive channel selection based on different frequency interactions. This module effectively maps correlations among channels in various frequency branches, augmenting the reconstruction process by incorporating omni-frequency features adaptively.

Experimental Results and Implications

OCR-GAN experimentally demonstrates superior performance across a variety of benchmark datasets, including MVTec AD, DAGM, and KolektorSDD, as well as the CIFAR-10 for semantic AD task. Specifically, OCR-GAN surpassed current state-of-the-art methods on the MVTec AD dataset with a notable AUC of 98.3 without requiring extra training data, marking a significant improvement over previous classical reconstruction-based methods. The ability to achieve this high AUC without additional data emphasizes the model's practicality for real-world applications where training data is limited or expensive to obtain.

Future Directions

The paper suggests that reconstruction-based methods can achieve competitive scores through careful design and frequency domain exploitation, opening avenues for further exploration of lightweight models and frequency-sensitive anomaly detection strategies. Future work might address extending the omni-frequency reconstruction concept across other domains and further refining the lightweight model design to balance efficiency and efficacy comprehensively.

In summary, the OCR-GAN offers a crucial step forward in the reconstruction-based anomaly detection arena, providing a practical and high-performing solution that includes decoupling and interacting frequency components efficiently for enhanced anomaly detection.