2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2022.01.330
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative analysis of machine learning models for anomaly detection in manufacturing

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Adopting the Cross-Industry Standard Process for Data Mining (CRISP-DM) methodology in our investigation into the capabilities of an isolation forest ensemble for detecting stock market manipulation offers a structured, iterative, and comprehensive framework that significantly enhances the study's scientific rigor and practical applicability. The CRISP-DM methodology has been previously and successfully employed in other machine learning projects, as evidenced by the literature [21][22][23]. By meticulously following CRISP-DM's phases-from understanding the business problem and data to model evaluation and deployment-we ensure a deep alignment between our models and the real-world phenomenon of market manipulation.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Adopting the Cross-Industry Standard Process for Data Mining (CRISP-DM) methodology in our investigation into the capabilities of an isolation forest ensemble for detecting stock market manipulation offers a structured, iterative, and comprehensive framework that significantly enhances the study's scientific rigor and practical applicability. The CRISP-DM methodology has been previously and successfully employed in other machine learning projects, as evidenced by the literature [21][22][23]. By meticulously following CRISP-DM's phases-from understanding the business problem and data to model evaluation and deployment-we ensure a deep alignment between our models and the real-world phenomenon of market manipulation.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the nanocrystalline grain growth example provided in the previous section, the anomalous spikes in the diffraction pattern were identified automatically by an explicit search algorithm and a traditional statistical threshold approach based on the Z-score [14]. There are many different approaches for anomaly detection; relevant example references relating to anomaly detection in microstructure and materials manufacturing are provided here for several techniques: k-nearest neighbour [41], local outlier factor and isolation forests [42,43], support vector machines [44], replicator neural networks [45], autoencoders [46], long short-term memory neural networks [47], Bayesian networks [48], hidden Markov models [49,50], cluster-analysis methods [51,52], and feature bagging [53]. While many of these techniques are unsupervised and can automatically detect anomalies, some methods like decision trees and k-nearest neighbours typically require supervised training by an expert and therefore foreknowledge of the anomaly.…”
Section: The Role Of Computational Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consequently, the approach enabled successful detection of defective engines with high probability before shipment. Kharitonov et al [24] conducted an evaluation of ten machine learning models for the detection of anomalies in the manufacturing field, including unsupervised learning methods such as k-nearest neighbors (KNN), Autoencoder, LOF, and COPOD. These methods do not require prior knowledge of abnormal patterns but rely on understanding the characteristics and structure of the data.…”
Section: Cases Of Potential Failure Identificationmentioning
confidence: 99%