4.6 Article

RDPOD: an unsupervised approach for outlier detection

期刊

NEURAL COMPUTING & APPLICATIONS
卷 34, 期 2, 页码 1065-1077

出版社

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00521-021-06432-6

关键词

Outlier detection; Local outlier factor (LOF); Local distance-based outlier factor (LDOF); Relative density-based factor (RDOS); Natural outlier factor (NOF); Symmetric neighborhood (INFLO); Density peaks clustering

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The paper proposes a hybrid approach named RDPOD, which efficiently utilizes distance-based and density-based clustering methods to correctly identify the density of each point. Analysis of experimental results shows that our proposed approach outperforms other popular techniques in detecting outlier points.
Outliers are the data points which deviate significantly from the majority of the data points. Finding outliers is an important task in various applications, especially in data mining. The unsupervised technique is very popular to mine outliers in a dataset over supervised techniques. Various unsupervised approaches have been proposed over the last decades. Clustering-based, distance-based, and density-based outlier approaches are found to be successful for detecting outlier points. However, the main focus of clustering-based method is to identifying clustering structure. Many distance-based and density-based techniques are not suitable for varying density datasets, and they are also very sensitive with their parameter (number of nearest-neighbor (k)). In this paper, we propose a hybrid approach named RDPOD, which utilizes distance-based and density-based clustering approaches efficiently for identifying the density of each point correctly. We obtain local density and relative distance of each data instance. From this density and distance information, we identify outlier points. Experimental results with real-world datasets show that our proposed approach outperforms the popular techniques LOF, LDOF, symmetric neighborhood, and recently introduced approaches NOF and RDOS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据