🤖 AI Summary
This study addresses the challenge posed by severe class imbalance in anomaly detection, which complicates the interpretation and comparison of common evaluation metrics. The authors systematically analyze the behavior of AUROC, AUPR, F1-score, and Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) across varying anomaly ratios and introduce a novel "metric landscape" visualization technique. This approach reveals, for the first time, each metric’s inherent preference for true positive rate versus true negative rate and how their stability varies with imbalance levels. By modeling the relationship between metrics and anomaly prevalence, the work delineates clear applicability boundaries for each metric, thereby providing a principled, interpretable foundation for reliable metric selection in highly imbalanced anomaly detection scenarios.
📝 Abstract
Anomaly detection is inherently characterised by severe class imbalance, making the interpretation of evaluation metrics challenging. Although metrics such as AUROC, AUPR, F1-score, and MCC are widely used, their values convey different meanings depending on the anomaly ratio. In this work, we analyse the behaviour of those four common anomaly detection metrics under varying levels of imbalance. We focus on the study of metric landscapes, visualisations that relate metric values to true positive and true negative rates, providing an intuitive view of metric preferences and stability. Our analysis offers practical guidance for interpreting and comparing anomaly detection results across datasets with different imbalance ratios.