Skip to content

Witnesses Explain Anomalies

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 50 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

WAND is an unsupervised tabular anomaly detector that is explainable by design, and attains the best mean Friedman rank at ROC-AUC parity with 16 unsupervised baselines, so the gain is interpretability at no accuracy cost.

Abstract

Unsupervised anomaly detection scores each point of an unlabelled, contaminated sample in a single pass, and increasingly must also explain why a point is flagged. Yet the dominant detectors give a score with no account of which features drive it, and explanations are bolted on post-hoc with SHAP or LIME, which re-query the detector thousands of times per point and only approximate it. We introduce WAND, an unsupervised tabular anomaly detector that is explainable by design. WAND organises its computation around directions on the unit sphere, scoring each point by how far its projection escapes a sub-Gaussian extreme-value baseline. The originality of our approach is that the witness directions that flag a point, being vectors in feature space, are its explanation, a per-feature attribution obtained at no cost over scoring and, since the score is differentiable, recoverable by gradients. Scoring is linear in the sample size, and a probe-efficiency bound guarantees every anomaly a witness, hence an explanation. Across 47 ADBench datasets WAND attains the best mean Friedman rank at ROC-AUC parity with 16 unsupervised baselines, so the gain is interpretability at no accuracy cost; its native explanations are more accurate and faithful than post-hoc SHAP/LIME and ECOD at a fraction of the query cost. WAND is thus a practical, interpretable solution for explainable anomaly detection.

View source

Similar papers

Preprint Sep 2026

A Principled Approach to Unsupervised Anomaly Detection

Traditional unsupervised anomaly detection (UAD) methods are designed to flag or localise deviations from a normative distribution, ignoring the underlying generative mechanisms of the anomalies. Yet the nature of an anomaly is often as important as its presence. We reformulate UAD as a Bayesian inverse problem, in whi...

James Myles, Matthew Baugh, J. Müller et al. · 2 citations
#machine learning Preprint Sep 2026

Verdict Instability of OOD Scores under Reference Resampling

A rule is given that predicts that abstention driven by a wrong-signed score turns out worse than abstention at random on every dataset the authors test, and abstention driven by a wrong-signed score turns out worse than abstention at random on every dataset they test.

Donghoon Lee, Shinjin Kang · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

Have an LLM Write Your Anomaly Detector: Autonomous Discovery of Compact, Interpretable Detectors for Time Series

Time-series anomaly detection trades off predictive accuracy, computational efficiency, and interpretability. We use a large language model not as the detector but as the author of one: an autonomous research loop in which the model repeatedly edits a single short NumPy program under a leakage-free objective, keeping t...

D. Berghaus · 0 citations
#machine learning Preprint Oct 2026

RIFT: Relative Isolation From Trees For Anomaly Detection

Isolation Forest (IF) is a widely used baseline for unsupervised anomaly detection. Recent studies provide a closed-form expression for the infinite-forest limit for one-dimensional data. Inspired by the geometric interpretation of this formula, we introduce RIFT (Relative Isolation From Trees), a deterministic anomaly...

Márk Dániel Szalai, Gábor Horváth · 0 citations

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Sep 29, 2026

Who we become when we talk to machines

Professor Sherry Turkle’s new book, “Artificial Intimacy,” offers a withering critique of chatbots and the antisocial dynamics she believes they encourage.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.