Unusual data patterns or outliers can be generated because of human errors, incorrect measurements, or malicious activities. Detecting outliers is a difficult task that requires complex ensembles. An ideal outlier detection ensemble should consider the strengths of individual base detectors while carefully combining their outputs to create a strong overall ensemble and achieve unbiased accuracy with minimal variance. Selecting and combining the outputs of dissimilar base learners is a challenging task. This paper proposes a model that utilizes heterogeneous base learners. It adaptively boosts the outcomes of preceding learners in the first phase by assigning weights and identifying high‐performing learners based on their local domains, and then carefully fuses their outcomes in the second phase to improve overall accuracy. Experimental results from 10 benchmark datasets are used to train and test the proposed model. To investigate its accuracy in terms of separating outliers from inliers, the proposed model is tested and evaluated using accuracy metrics. The analyzed data are presented as crosstabs and percentages, followed by a descriptive method for synthesis and interpretation.

Irregular data or anomalies may occur due to human error, miscalculation, or malicious system behavior. The detection of anomalies is a difficult task that requires the use of multiple strategic methods and models. The ideal detection model should assess the strengths and optimize the results of its base models before making final decisions. This task of optimizing the results of the base models contributes to the generation of more accurate results overall. This work presents an optimized adaptive anomaly detection ensemble using heterogeneous algorithms. In the first stage, it adaptively boosts the outcomes of preceding models by weighting their decisions and finding high‐performance ones, and in the second stage, it optimizes the base models by score margin maximization, which enlarges the contrast between the scores of the anomalies and other data prior to fusion to improve detection accuracy. To validate the model, baselines and test results from 10 benchmark datasets are compared. To assess its effectiveness in terms of distinguishing anomalies, the proposed model is tested and evaluated. The analyzed data are presented as cross‐tabulations, with detailed explanations and interpretations. The experiments show an improvement in results even when the least of anomalies (single cases up to 10%) are used.