As information systems continuously expand, such as networks, the Internet of Things, and cloud computing, security and economic losses, as a consequence of anomalous events, have become increasingly prominent, and anomaly detection has become a fundamental competence for ensuring system reliability and security. High-dimensional, strongly nonlinear, and strongly temporally dependent data restrict the performance of anomaly detection methods based on a single technical route. Within this background, this research provides a formal description of anomaly detection and a classification of anomaly types, and categorizes time-series methods into six paradigms: clustering, prediction, reconstruction, representation learning, statistical, and hybrid. The paper expatiates on the anomaly discrimination mechanisms, parameter sensitivity, and complexity constraints of partitioning-, density-, and hierarchy-based clustering detection methods, as well as reconstruction-based and prediction-based detection frameworks based on autoencoders, long short-term memory networks, convolutional networks, Transformers, and generative adversarial networks, and then presents the objective functions and anomaly scoring forms of each method. A classification framework for fusion methods is constructed on the basis of three strategies: serial, parallel, and embedded. The findings show that combining the structural priors of clustering with the representation learning capability of deep models yields performance superior to that of a single method, however, the benefits are accompanied by increased model complexity and interpretation costs. In the meantime, four unresolved issues are identified: a unified fusion theory, adaptability to small samples and training set contamination, lightweight edge-side inference, and the construction of interpretable criteria.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jiawen Peng (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: