Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2301.06794

Subgraph Centralization: A Necessary Step for Graph Anomaly Detection

Zhong Zhuang·Kai Ming Ting·Guansong Pang·Shuaibin Song
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Graph anomaly detection has attracted a lot of interest recently. Despite their successes, existing detectors have at least two of the three weaknesses: (a) high computational cost which limits them to small-scale networks only; (b) existing treatment of subgraphs produces suboptimal detection accuracy; and (c) unable to provide an explanation as to why a node is anomalous, once it is identified. We identify that the root cause of these weaknesses is a lack of a proper treatment for subgraphs. A treatment called Subgraph Centralization for graph anomaly detection is proposed to address all the above weaknesses. Its importance is shown in two ways. First, we present a simple yet effective new framework called Graph-Centric Anomaly Detection (GCAD). The key advantages of GCAD over existing detectors including deep-learning detectors are: (i) better anomaly detection accuracy; (ii) linear time complexity with respect to the number of nodes; and (iii) it is a generic framework that admits an existing point anomaly detector to be used to detect node anomalies in a network. Second, we show that Subgraph Centralization can be incorporated into two existing detectors to overcome the above-mentioned weaknesses.

Explore related subjects

cs.LGcs.SI

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Zhong Zhuang, Kai Ming Ting, Guansong Pang, Shuaibin Song. 2023-01-17. Subgraph Centralization: A Necessary Step for Graph Anomaly Detection. https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.06794

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG↗