skip to main content
10.1145/3635118.3635120acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicaipConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A two-stage network based on edge information for visual anomaly detection

Authors Info & Claims
Published:05 February 2024Publication History

ABSTRACT

Reconstruction-based approaches attract increasing attention in unsupervised visual anomaly detection. Such methods rely on the assumption that reconstruction models trained using only normal images are not well reconstructed for anomalous data, so that the anomalous regions can be identified by computing the differences in the reconstructions. However, it's usually challenging to manage the model's generalization boundaries in practice. The model with a poor generalization capability will produce additional image differences in the normal regions, while the model with an overly strong generalization capability can even well reconstruct the abnormal regions, making the abnormal regions less distinguishable from the normal regions. In this paper, we propose a two-stage reconstruction network to solve the above problems, which can generate high-accuracy and anomaly-free reconstruction. Specifically, our two-stage anomaly detection network consists of the edge extraction sub-network and the image restoration sub-network. The first sub-network generates anomaly-free grayscale edges of the image as intermediate results, and then the second one recovers normal color and low-frequency information for the intermediate results. The proposed network can generate high-accuracy and anomaly-free reconstructions to maximize the difference between the reconstruction errors of normal and abnormal samples, which can ultimately improve the accuracy of anomaly detection. Experiments on the dataset MVTec AD show that our proposed method achieves competitive results in anomaly detection and anomaly localization (97.8% for detection and 97.7% for localization, AUROC).

References

  1. Nina Shvetsova, Bart Bakker, Irina Fedulova, Heinrich Schulz, Dmitry V. Dylov. 2021. Anomaly detection in medical imaging with deep perceptual autoencoders. IEEE Access, 9, 118571-118583. Doi: 10.1109/access.2021.310716.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Clifton Phua, Vincent Lee, Kate Smith, Ross Gayler. 2010. A comprehensive survey of data mining-based fraud detection research. arXiv preprint, arXiv:1009.6119. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1009.6119.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Yajie Cui, Zhaoxiang Liu, and Shiguo Lian. 2022. A survey on unsupervised industrial anomaly detection algorithms. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2204.11161. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2204.11161.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Paul Bergmann, Sindy Löwe, Michael Fauser, David Sattlegger, Carsten Steger. 2018. Improving unsupervised defect segmentation by applying structural similarity to autoencoders. arXiv preprint, arXiv:1807.02011. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1807.02011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Dong Gong, Lingqiao Liu, Vuong Le, Budhaditya Saha, Moussa Reda Mansour, Svetha Venkatesh, Anton van den Hengel. 2019. Memorizing normality to detect anomaly: Memory-augmented deep autoencoder for unsupervised anomaly detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision(ICCV 2019), 1705-1714. Doi: 10.1109/ICCV.2019.00179.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Thomas Schlegl, Philipp Seeböck, Sebastian M. Waldstein, Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth and Georg Langs. 2017. Unsupervised anomaly detection with generative adversarial networks to guide marker discovery. In Information Processing in Medical Imaging: 25th International Conference, IPMI 2017, Boone, NC, USA, June 25-30, 2017, Proceedings. Cham, Springer International Publishing, 146-157. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59050-9_12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Samet Akcay, Amir Atapour-Abarghouei and Toby P. Breckon. 2019. Ganomaly: Semi-supervised anomaly detection via adversarial training. In Computer Vision-ACCV 2018: 14th Asian Conference on Computer Vision, Perth, Australia, December 2-6, 2018, Revised Selected Papers, Part III 14(ACCV 2019), Springer International Publishing, 622-637. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20893-6_39.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Samet Akçay, Amir Atapour-Abarghouei and Toby P. Breckon. 2019. Skip-ganomaly: Skip connected and adversarially trained encoder-decoder anomaly detection. In 2019 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN 2019), IEEE, 1-8. Doi: 10.1109/IJCNN.2019.8851808.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Chaoqin Huang, Fei Ye, Jinkun Cao, Maosen Li, Ya Zhang, Cewu Lu. 2020. Attribute restoration framework for anomaly detection. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 24, 116-127. Doi: 10.1109/TMM.2020.3046884.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Vitjan Zavrtanik, Matej Kristan, Danijel Skočaj. 2021. Draem-a discriminatively trained reconstruction embedding for surface anomaly detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision(ICCV 2021), 8330-8339. Doi: 10.1109/ICCV48922.2021.00822.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Chunliang Li, Kihyuk Sohn, Jinsung Yoon, Tomas Pfister. 2021. Cutpaste: Self-supervised learning for anomaly detection and localization. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR 2021), 9664-9674. Doi: 10.1109/CVPR46437.2021.00954.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Paul Bergmann, Michael Fauser, David Sattlegger, Carsten Steger. 2019. Mvtec ad-a comprehensive real-world dataset for unsupervised anomaly detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR 2019), 9592-9600. Doi: 10.1109/cvpr.2019.00982.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Guansong Pang, Chunhua Shen, Longbing Cao, Anton Van Den Hengel. 2021.Deep learning for anomaly detection: A review, ACM computing surveys (CSUR), 54(2), 1-38. https://doi.org/10.1145/3439950.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Raghavendra Chalapathy, Aditya Krishna Menon, Sanjay Chawla. 2018. Anomaly detection using one-class neural networks. arXiv preprint, arXiv:1802.06360. https://doi.org/10.1145/3439950.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Lukas Ruff, Robert Vandermeulen, Nico Goernitz, Lucas Deecke, Shoaib Ahmed Siddiqui, Alexander Binder, Emmanuel Müller, Marius Kloft. 2018. Deep one-class classification. In International conference on machine learning(ICML 2018), PMLR, 4393-4402. Available from https://proceedings.mlr.press/v80/ruff18a.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Jihun Yi, Sungroh Yoon. 2020. Patch svdd: Patch-level svdd for anomaly detection and segmentation. In Proceedings of the Asian Conference on Computer Vision(ACCV 2020). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2006.16067.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Niv Cohen, Yedid Hoshen. 2020. Sub-image anomaly detection with deep pyramid correspondences. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2005.02357..https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2005.02357.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Oliver Rippel, Patrick Mertens, and Dorit Merhof. 2021. Modeling the Distribution of Normal Data in Pre-Trained Deep Features for Anomaly Detection. In 2020 25th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR 2020), IEEE, 6726-6733. Doi: 10.1109/ICPR48806.2021.9412109.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Shenzhi Wang, Liwei Wu, Lei Cui, Yujun Shen. 2021. Glancing at the Patch: Anomaly Localization with Global and Local Feature Comparison. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition(CVPR 2021), 254-263. Doi: 10.1109/cvpr46437.2021.00032.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Mayu Sakurada, and Takehisa Yairi. 2014. Anomaly detection using autoencoders with nonlinear dimensionality reduction. In Proceedings of the MLSDA 2014 2nd workshop on machine learning for sensory data analysis, 4-11. Doi: 10.1145/2689746.2689747.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. VanLoi Cao, Miguel Nicolau, and James McDermott. 2016. A hybrid autoencoder and density estimation model for anomaly detection. In Parallel Problem Solving from Nature–PPSN XIV: 14th International Conference, Edinburgh, UK, September 17-21, 2016, Proceedings 14, Springer International Publishing, 717-726. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45823-6_67.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Hyunjong Park, Jongyoun Noh, and Bumsub Ham. 2020. Learning Memory-Guided Normality for Anomaly Detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition(CVPR 2020), 14372-14381. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2003.13228.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Jinlei Hou, Yingying Zhang, Qiaoyong Zhong, Di Xie, Shiliang Pu, Hong Zhou. 2021. Divide-and-Assemble: Learning Block-wise Memory for Unsupervised Anomaly. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision(CVPR 2021), 8791-8800. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2107.13118.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Izhak Golan, and Ran El-Yaniv. 2018. Detection Deep anomaly detection using geometric transformations. Advances in neural information processing systems(NeurIPS 2018), 31. https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.10917.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Jonathan Pirnay, and Keng Chai. 2022. Inpainting Transformer for Anomaly Detection. In Image Analysis and Processing–ICIAP 2022: 21st International Conference, 2022, Proceedings, Part II, Cham, Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06430-2_33.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Vitjan Zavrtanik, Matej Kristan, and Danijel Skočaj. 2021. Reconstruction by inpainting for visual anomaly detection. Pattern Recognition, 112, 107706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2020.107706.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Tongkun Liu, Bing Li, Zhuo Zhao, Xiao Du, Bingke Jiang, Leqi Geng. 2022. Reconstruction from edge image combined with color and gradient difference for industrial surface anomaly detection. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2210.14485. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2210.14485.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Paul Bergmann, Michael Fauser, David Sattlegger, Carsten Steger. 2020. Uninformed students: Student-teacher anomaly detection with discriminative latent embeddings. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR 2020), 4183-4192. Doi: 10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.00424.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Yunfei Liu, Chaoqun Zhuang, Feng Lu. 2021. Unsupervised Two-Stage Anomaly Detection. arXiv preprint, arXiv: 2103.11671. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2103.11671.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. A two-stage network based on edge information for visual anomaly detection
      Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        ICAIP '23: Proceedings of the 2023 7th International Conference on Advances in Image Processing
        November 2023
        90 pages
        ISBN:9798400708275
        DOI:10.1145/3635118

        Copyright © 2023 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 5 February 2024

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)11
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format