mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Try with Simpler -- An Evaluation of Improved Principal Component Analysis in Log-based Anomaly Detection

arXiv 2308.12612 ↗First posted 24 Aug 2023cs.LG cs.SEcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The rapid growth of deep learning (DL) has spurred interest in enhancing log-based anomaly detection. This approach aims to extract meaning from log events (log message templates) and develop advanced DL models for anomaly detection. However, these DL methods face challenges like heavy reliance on training data, labels, and computational resources due to model complexity. In contrast, traditional machine learning and data mining techniques are less data-dependent and more efficient but less effective than DL. To make log-based anomaly detection more practical, the goal is to enhance traditional techniques to match DL's effectiveness. Previous research in a different domain (linking questions on Stack Overflow) suggests that optimized traditional techniques can rival state-of-the-art DL methods. Drawing inspiration from this concept, we conducted an empirical study. We optimized the unsupervised PCA (Principal Component Analysis), a traditional technique, by incorporating lightweight semantic-based log representation. This addresses the issue of unseen log events in training data, enhancing log representation. Our study compared seven log-based anomaly detection methods, including four DL-based, two traditional, and the optimized PCA technique, using public and industrial datasets. Results indicate that the optimized unsupervised PCA technique achieves similar effectiveness to advanced supervised/semi-supervised DL methods while being more stable with limited training data and resource-efficient. This demonstrates the adaptability and strength of traditional techniques through small yet impactful adaptations.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 92 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Aug 2023.

Builds on

19 of 92 references.

References · 19

  1. 2014Empirical Evaluation of Gated Recurrent Neural Networks on Sequence Modelingcited by 2,367
  2. 2016Enriching Word Vectors with Subword Informationcited by 1,583
  3. 2016Bag of Tricks for Efficient Text Classificationcited by 876
  4. 2020Evaluation: from precision, recall and F-measure to ROC, informedness, markedness and correlationcited by 425
  5. 2016FastText.zip: Compressing text classification modelscited by 335
  6. 2017Accelerated Hierarchical Density Clusteringcited by 102
  7. 2021Log-based Anomaly Detection Without Log Parsingcited by 59
  8. 2022Log-based Anomaly Detection with Deep Learning: How Far Are We?cited by 57
  9. 2018Tools and Benchmarks for Automated Log Parsingcited by 56
  10. 2022Avoiding Overfitting: A Survey on Regularization Methods for Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 55
  11. 2020A Survey on Automated Log Analysis for Reliability Engineeringcited by 50
  12. 2021Experience Report: Deep Learning-based System Log Analysis for Anomaly Detectioncited by 37
7 more
  1. 2017Easy over Hard: A Case Study on Deep Learningcited by 20
  2. 2019Shapley Values of Reconstruction Errors of PCA for Explaining Anomaly Detectioncited by 19
  3. 2018Robust PCA for Anomaly Detection in Cyber Networkscited by 15
  4. 2019Logzip: Extracting Hidden Structures via Iterative Clustering for Log Compressioncited by 14
  5. 2016Integrating Distributional Lexical Contrast into Word Embeddings for Antonym-Synonym Distinctioncited by 13
  6. 2021Robust and Transferable Anomaly Detection in Log Data using Pre-Trained Language Modelscited by 12
  7. 2022LogGD:Detecting Anomalies from System Logs by Graph Neural Networkscited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.

1 paper.