arXiv:2607.26582cs.CV2026-07

零样本异常检测排名不靠谱,不同数据下最优检测器会翻转。

Level, Sharpness, and Corpus: Why Zero-Shot OOD Detector Rankings Do Not Transfer

论文配图:Level, Sharpness, and Corpus: Why Zero-Shot OOD Detector Rankings Do Not Transfer
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 发现检测器排名在不同数据集上频繁反转,无通用最优解。
  • 所有检测器在至少一个领域FPR95超80%,表明性能不稳定。
  • 提出无需额外数据的CEG框架,提升鲁棒性且不依赖外部语料。

在十七个分布内数据集、三个视觉语言模型和七个代表性零样本异常检测器的可控迁移审计中,我们发现检测器排名在不同部署场景下频繁反转。每个检测器在至少一个领域中FPR95超过80%,最佳选择同时依赖分布内数据和底层视觉语言模型。根源在于视觉语言模型输出中存在互补证据通道:无语料检测器依赖绝对匹配程度与相对/空间锐度,而基于WordNet的方法还受外部语义覆盖影响。分析表明,匹配程度与锐度无法相互推导,因此单一检测器无法跨域可靠迁移。为此,我们提出检测器无关的互补证据守护器(CEG),通过仅使用分布内经验百分位数的非补偿融合,保留原始信号中的多重证据。替换为熵、对数几率方差或随机噪声均无法复现性能提升。无需异常样本、辅助语料或学习融合,CEG将家庭平衡的FPR95从38.1降至28.8,整体平均从42.6降至30.5。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Selecting a zero-shot out-of-distribution (OOD) detector for a new deployment is typically based on benchmark rankings, implicitly assuming that the highest-ranked detector will transfer across domains. We show that this assumption does not hold. Through a controlled portability audit across seventeen in-distribution datasets, three vision-language models, and seven representative zero-shot OOD detectors, we find that detector rankings reverse across deployments, every detector exceeds $80\%$ FPR95 on at least one domain, and the preferred detector depends on both the in-distribution data and the underlying VLM. We trace these reversals to complementary evidence channels in vision-language logits. Corpus-free detectors rely on different combinations of absolute match level and relative or spatial sharpness, while WordNet-based methods additionally depend on external semantic coverage. A simple proposition shows that level and sharpness cannot generally be recovered from one another, explaining why no single detector transfers reliably across deployments. Motivated by this diagnosis, we introduce the Complementary Evidence Guard (CEG), a detector-agnostic wrapper that preserves complementary evidence through a non-compensatory fusion of the base detector, level, and sharpness using only empirical in-distribution percentiles. Controls replacing these channels with entropy, logit variance, or random noise do not reproduce the gains. Without OOD samples, auxiliary corpora, or learned fusion, CEG reduces detector sensitivity and improves GL-MCM from $38.1$ to $28.8$ and MCM from $42.6$ to $30.5$ family-balanced FPR95.

异常检测零样本视觉语言模型可迁移性

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。