mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Do autoencoders need a bottleneck for anomaly detection?

arXiv 2202.12637 ↗First posted 25 Feb 2022cs.LG stat.MLcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

A common belief in designing deep autoencoders (AEs), a type of unsupervised neural network, is that a bottleneck is required to prevent learning the identity function. Learning the identity function renders the AEs useless for anomaly detection. In this work, we challenge this limiting belief and investigate the value of non-bottlenecked AEs. The bottleneck can be removed in two ways: (1) overparameterising the latent layer, and (2) introducing skip connections. However, limited works have reported on the use of one of the ways. For the first time, we carry out extensive experiments covering various combinations of bottleneck removal schemes, types of AEs and datasets. In addition, we propose the infinitely-wide AEs as an extreme example of non-bottlenecked AEs. Their improvement over the baseline implies learning the identity function is not trivial as previously assumed. Moreover, we find that non-bottlenecked architectures (highest AUROC=0.857) can outperform their bottlenecked counterparts (highest AUROC=0.696) on the popular task of CIFAR (inliers) vs SVHN (anomalies), among other tasks, shedding light on the potential of developing non-bottlenecked AEs for improving anomaly detection.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Feb 2022.

Builds on

25 of 56 references.

References · 25

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
  3. 2015U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentationcited by 19,604
  4. 2016Layer Normalizationcited by 5,579
  5. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,416
  6. 2017Fashion-MNIST: a Novel Image Dataset for Benchmarking Machine Learning Algorithmscited by 4,283
  7. 2013Auto-Encoding Variational Bayescited by 3,980
  8. 2016Gaussian Error Linear Units (GELUs)cited by 3,431
  9. 2017Visualizing the Loss Landscape of Neural Netscited by 1,126
  10. 2015Cyclical Learning Rates for Training Neural Networkscited by 627
  11. 2017Self-Normalizing Neural Networkscited by 591
  12. 2018Do Deep Generative Models Know What They Don't Know?cited by 443
13 more
  1. 2014Stochastic Gradient Hamiltonian Monte Carlocited by 341
  2. 2018Bayesian Deep Convolutional Networks with Many Channels are Gaussian Processescited by 164
  3. 2020Finite Versus Infinite Neural Networks: an Empirical Studycited by 156
  4. 2019Neural Tangents: Fast and Easy Infinite Neural Networks in Pythoncited by 149
  5. 2019Tensor Programs I: Wide Feedforward or Recurrent Neural Networks of Any Architecture are Gaussian Processescited by 148
  6. 2020Infinite attention: NNGP and NTK for deep attention networkscited by 117
  7. 2018Uncertainty in Neural Networks: Approximately Bayesian Ensemblingcited by 94
  8. 2013Density Estimation in Infinite Dimensional Exponential Familiescited by 41
  9. 2019Why bigger is not always better: on finite and infinite neural networkscited by 41
  10. 2020Improved anomaly detection by training an autoencoder with skip connections on images corrupted with Stain-shaped noisecited by 39
  11. 2019Identity Crisis: Memorization and Generalization under Extreme Overparameterizationcited by 33
  12. 2019Benefits of Jointly Training Autoencoders: An Improved Neural Tangent Kernel Analysiscited by 13
  13. 2018Denoising Auto-encoder with Recurrent Skip Connections and Residual Regression for Music Source Separationcited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 1.

3 papers.