Show source-provided references
2. Yu, A., and Yang, Y.B. (2023, January 4–10). Learning to explain: A gradient-based attribution method for interpreting super-resolution networks. Proceedings of the ICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Rhodes Island, Greek.
10.1109/ICASSP49357.2023.10095368 ↗3. A survey on explainable anomaly detection
4. Xu, L., Wang, B., Zhao, D., and Wu, X. (2025). DAN: Neural network based on dual attention for anomaly detection in ICS. Expert Syst. Appl., 263.
10.1016/j.eswa.2024.125766 ↗7. Carletti, M., Masiero, C., Beghi, A., and Susto, G.A. (2019, January 6–9). Explainable machine learning in industry 4.0: Evaluating feature importance in anomaly detection to enable root cause analysis. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE international conference on systems, man and cybernetics (SMC), Bari, Italy.
10.1109/SMC.2019.8913901 ↗8. Sundararajan, M., Taly, A., and Yan, Q. (2017, January 6). Axiomatic attribution for deep networks. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, Sydney, Australia.
9. Han, X., Cheng, H., Xu, D., and Yuan, S. (2021, January 24–26). InterpretableSAD: Interpretable Anomaly Detection in Sequential Log Data, Sydney. Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Big Data, Chengdu, China.
10.1109/BigData52589.2021.9671642 ↗10. Sipple, J. (2020, January 7). Interpretable, multidimensional, multimodal anomaly detection with negative sampling for detection of device failure. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning. International Conference on Machine Learning (PMLR), San Francisco, CA, USA.
11. Yang, R., Wang, B., and Bilgic, M. (2023, January 18). IDGI: A framework to eliminate explanation noise from integrated gradients. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
10.1109/CVPR52729.2023.02272 ↗12. Nguyen, Q.P., Lim, K.W., Divakaran, D.M., Low, K.H., and Chan, M.C. (2019, January 3–5). Gee: A gradient-based explainable variational autoencoder for network anomaly detection. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Conference on Communications and Network Security (CNS), Washington, DC, USA.
10.1109/CNS.2019.8802833 ↗14. Yang, Y., Wang, P., He, X., and Zou, D. (2024). GRAM: An interpretable approach for graph anomaly detection using gradient attention maps. Neural Netw., 178.
10.1016/j.neunet.2024.106463 ↗15. Kauffmann, J., Müller, K.R., and Montavon, G. (2020). Towards explaining anomalies: A deep Taylor decomposition of one-class models. Pattern Recognit., 101.
10.1016/j.patcog.2020.107198 ↗16. Han, D., Wang, Z., Chen, W., Zhong, Y., Wang, S., Zhang, H., Yang, J., Shi, X., and Yin, X. (2011, January 15–19). Deepaid: Interpreting and improving deep learning-based anomaly detection in security applications. Proceedings of the 2021 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, New York, NY, USA.
10.1145/3460120.3484589 ↗17. Explainable anomaly traffic detection based on sparse autoencoders
18. Kraskov, A., Stögbauer, H., and Grassberger, P. (2004). Estimating mutual information. Phys. Rev. Stat. Nonlinear Soft Matter Phys., 69.
10.1103/PhysRevE.69.066138 ↗19. Tang, S., Ding, Y., and Wang, H. (2025). Industrial Control Anomaly Detection Based on Distributed Linear Deep Learning. Comput. Mater. Contin., 82.
10.32604/cmc.2024.059143 ↗20. Lundberg, S.M., and Lee, S.I. (2017). A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., 30.
21. Ribeiro, M.T., Singh, S., and Guestrin, C. (2016, January 13–17). “Why should i trust you?” Explaining the predictions of any classifier. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco, CA, USA.
10.1145/2939672.2939778 ↗