[37] C.-L. Li, K. Sohn, J. Yoon, and T. Pfister. Cutpaste: Self-supervised learning for anomaly detection and localization. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 9664-9674, 2021.
[38] S. Li, X. Ji, E. Dobriban, O. Sokolsky, and I. Lee. Pac-wrap: Semi-supervised pac anomaly detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.10798, 2022.
[39] Z. Li, Y. Zhao, N. Botta, C. Ionescu, and X. Hu. Copod: copula-based outlier detection. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM), pages 1118-1123. IEEE, 2020.
[40] Z. Li, Y. Zhao, X. Hu, N. Botta, C. Ionescu, and G. Chen. Ecod: Unsupervised outlier detection using empirical cumulative distribution functions. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 2022.
[41] O. Lindenbaum, Y. Aizenbud, and Y. Kluger. Probabilistic robust autoencoders for outlier detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.00494, 2021.
[42] F. T. Liu, K. M. Ting, and Z.-H. Zhou. Isolation-based anomaly detection. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data (TKDD), 6(1):1-39, 2012.
[43] M. Q. Ma, Y. Zhao, X. Zhang, and L. Akoglu. A large-scale study on unsupervised outlier model selection: Do internal strategies suffice? arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.01422, 2021.
[44] C. Marrocco, M. Molinara, and F. Tortorella. An empirical comparison of ideal and empirical roc-based reject rules. In International Workshop on Machine Learning and Data Mining in Pattern Recognition, pages 47-60. Springer, 2007.
[45] L. Martí, N. Sanchez-Pi, J. M. Molina, and A. C. B. Garcia. Anomaly detection based on sensor data in petroleum industry applications. Sensors, 2015.
[46] V.-L. Nguyen and E. Hullermeier. Reliable multilabel classification: Prediction with partial abstention. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 34, pages 5264-5271, 2020.
[47] G. Pang, L. Cao, L. Chen, and H. Liu. Learning representations of ultrahigh-dimensional data for random distance-based outlier detection. In Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery & data mining, pages 2041-2050, 2018.
[48] L. Perini, C. Galvin, and V. Vercruyssen. A ranking stability measure for quantifying the robustness of anomaly detection methods. In Joint European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases, pages 397-408. Springer, 2020.
[49] L. Perini, V. Vercruyssen, and J. Davis. Quantifying the confidence of anomaly detectors in their example-wise predictions. In Joint European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases, pages 227–243. Springer, 2020.
[50] L. Perini, V. Vercruyssen, and J. Davis. Transferring the contamination factor between anomaly detection domains by shape similarity. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 36, pages 4128-4136, 2022.
[51] L. Perini, P.-C. Bürkner, and A. Klami. Estimating the contamination factor's distribution in unsupervised anomaly detection. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 27668-27679. PMLR, 2023.
[52] L. Perini, D. Giannuzzi, and J. Davis. How to allocate your label budget? choosing between active learning and learning to reject in anomaly detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.02909, 2023.
[53] T. Pevny. Loda: Lightweight on-line detector of anomalies. Machine Learning, 102(2):275-304, 2016.
[54] A. Pugnana and S. Ruggieri. Auc-based selective classification. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 2494–2514. PMLR, 2023.