Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3663529.3663857acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesfseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Decoding Anomalies! Unraveling Operational Challenges in Human-in-the-Loop Anomaly Validation

Published: 10 July 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Artificial intelligence has been driving new industrial solutions for challenging problems in recent years, with many companies leveraging AI to enhance business processes and products. Automated anomaly detection emerges as one of the top priorities in AI adoption, sought after by numerous small to large-scale enterprises. Extending beyond domain-specific applications like software log analytics, where anomaly detection has perhaps garnered the most interest in software engineering, we find that very little research effort has been devoted to post-anomaly detection, such as validating anomalies. For example, validating anomalies requires human-in-the-loop interaction, though working with human experts is challenging due to uncertain requirements on how to elicit valuable feedback from them, posing formidable operationalizing challenges. In this study, we provide an experience report delving into a more holistic view of the complexities of adopting effective anomaly detection models from a requirement engineering perspective. We address challenges and provide solutions to mitigate challenges associated with operationalizing anomaly detection from diverse perspectives: inherent issues in dynamic datasets, diverse business contexts, and the dynamic interplay between human expertise and AI guidance in the decision-making process. We believe our experience report will provide insights for other companies looking to adopt anomaly detection in their own business settings.

References

[1]
Crispin Almodovar, Fariza Sabrina, Sarvnaz Karimi, and Salahuddin Azad. 2024. LogFiT: Log Anomaly Detection using Fine-Tuned Language Models. IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management ( 2024 ).
[2]
Horace B Barlow. 1989. Unsupervised learning. Neural computation 1, 3 ( 1989 ), 295-311.
[3]
Eric Bogert, Aaron Schecter, and Richard T Watson. 2021. Humans rely more on algorithms than social influence as a task becomes more dificult. Scientific reports 11, 1 ( 2021 ), 8028.
[4]
Eric Breck, Neoklis Polyzotis, Sudip Roy, Steven Whang, and Martin Zinkevich. 2019. Data Validation for Machine Learning. In MLSys.
[5]
Mete Çelik, Filiz Dadaşer-Çelik, and Ahmet Şakir Dokuz. 2011. Anomaly detection in temperature data using DBSCAN algorithm. In 2011 international symposium on innovations in intelligent systems and applications. IEEE, 91-95.
[6]
Zhuangbin Chen, Jinyang Liu, Wenwei Gu, Yuxin Su, and Michael R Lyu. 2021. Experience report: Deep learning-based system log analysis for anomaly detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.05908 ( 2021 ).
[7]
Qiang Fu, Jian-Guang Lou, Yi Wang, and Jiang Li. 2009. Execution anomaly detection in distributed systems through unstructured log analysis. In 2009 ninth IEEE international conference on data mining. IEEE, 149-158.
[8]
Hongcheng Guo, Jian Yang, Jiaheng Liu, Jiaqi Bai, Boyang Wang, Zhoujun Li, Tieqiao Zheng, Bo Zhang, Qi Tian, et al. 2024. LogFormer: A Pre-train and Tuning Pipeline for Log Anomaly Detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.04749 ( 2024 ).
[9]
Shayan Hashemi and Mika Mäntylä. 2021. OneLog: Towards end-to-end training in software log anomaly detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.07324 ( 2021 ).
[10]
Shilin He, Jieming Zhu, Pinjia He, and Michael R Lyu. 2016. Experience report: System log analysis for anomaly detection. In 2016 IEEE 27th international symposium on software reliability engineering (ISSRE). IEEE, 207-218.
[11]
Joshua Klayman. 1995. Varieties of confirmation bias. Psychology of learning and motivation 32 ( 1995 ), 385-418.
[12]
Rashmi Kumari, MK Singh, R Jha, NK Singh, et al. 2016. Anomaly detection in network trafic using K-mean clustering. In 2016 3rd international conference on recent advances in information technology (RAIT). IEEE, 387-393.
[13]
Donghwoon Kwon, Hyunjoo Kim, Jinoh Kim, Sang C Suh, Ikkyun Kim, and Kuinam J Kim. 2019. A survey of deep learning-based network anomaly detection. Cluster Computing 22 ( 2019 ), 949-961.
[14]
Van-Hoang Le and Hongyu Zhang. 2021. Log-based anomaly detection without log parsing. In 2021 36th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE). IEEE, 492-504.
[15]
Fei Tony Liu, Kai Ming Ting, and Zhi-Hua Zhou. 2012. Isolation-based anomaly detection. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data (TKDD) 6, 1 ( 2012 ), 1-39.
[16]
Adam Oliner and Jon Stearley. 2007. What supercomputers say: A study of ifve system logs. In 37th annual IEEE/IFIP international conference on dependable systems and networks (DSN'07). IEEE, 575-584.
[17]
Capital One. 2022. Operationalizing Machine Learning Achieves Key Business Outcomes. https://ecm.capitalone.com/WCM/tech/forrester-pdfs/ capitaloneforrestersnapshotmloctober2022.pdf
[18]
Jiho Shin, Reem Aleithan, Jaechang Nam, Junjie Wang, and Song Wang. 2021. Explainable software defect prediction: Are we there yet? arXiv preprint arXiv: 2111.10901 ( 2021 ).
[19]
Ashish Sureka. 2015. Kernel based sequential data anomaly detection in business process event logs. arXiv preprint arXiv:1507.01168 ( 2015 ).
[20]
Wei Xu, Ling Huang, Armando Fox, David Patterson, and Michael I Jordan. 2009. Detecting large-scale system problems by mining console logs. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGOPS 22nd symposium on Operating systems principles. 117-132.
[21]
Jieming Zhu, Shilin He, Jinyang Liu, Pinjia He, Qi Xie, Zibin Zheng, and Michael R Lyu. 2019. Tools and benchmarks for automated log parsing. In 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering : Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP). IEEE, 121-130.

Index Terms

  1. Decoding Anomalies! Unraveling Operational Challenges in Human-in-the-Loop Anomaly Validation

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    FSE 2024: Companion Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on the Foundations of Software Engineering
    July 2024
    715 pages
    ISBN:9798400706585
    DOI:10.1145/3663529
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 10 July 2024

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Anomaly Validation
    2. Requirement Engineering

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    FSE '24
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 112 of 543 submissions, 21%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 79
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)79
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)10
    Reflects downloads up to 13 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media