mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Is AUC the best measure for practical comparison of anomaly detectors?

arXiv 2305.04754 ↗First posted 8 May 2023cs.LGcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The area under receiver operating characteristics (AUC) is the standard measure for comparison of anomaly detectors. Its advantage is in providing a scalar number that allows a natural ordering and is independent on a threshold, which allows to postpone the choice. In this work, we question whether AUC is a good metric for anomaly detection, or if it gives a false sense of comfort, due to relying on assumptions which are unlikely to hold in practice. Our investigation shows that variations of AUC emphasizing accuracy at low false positive rate seem to be better correlated with the needs of practitioners, but also that we can compare anomaly detectors only in the case when we have representative examples of anomalous samples. This last result is disturbing, as it suggests that in many cases, we should do active or few-show learning instead of pure anomaly detection.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 May 2023.

Builds on

4 of 38 references.

References · 4

  1. 2018UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reductioncited by 2,841
  2. 2017Unsupervised Anomaly Detection with Generative Adversarial Networks to Guide Marker Discoverycited by 566
  3. 2015A Meta-Analysis of the Anomaly Detection Problemcited by 23
  4. 2016How to Evaluate the Quality of Unsupervised Anomaly Detection Algorithms?cited by 22

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

2 papers.