Modeling Normal Is All You Need: Joint Latent Clustering for Anomaly Detection in Multimodal Cyber-Physical Systems
Summary
This paper introduces a joint latent clustering approach for anomaly detection in multimodal cyber-physical systems, modeling normal behavior as a mixture of Gaussians in latent space, and proposes a fair evaluation protocol. It achieves state-of-the-art results on three real-world CPS datasets, particularly on difficult subsets.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 07/08/26, 04:45 AM
# Modeling Normal Is All You Need: Joint Latent Clustering for Anomaly Detection in Multimodal Cyber-Physical Systems Source: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.06094](https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.06094) [View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.06094) > Abstract:Faults on a cyber\-physical system \(CPS\) are too rare and unrepresentative to characterise, or even to select a model on, so detection must instead model normal behaviour; the standard point\-adjusted evaluation, however, rewards detectors that never do\. CPS normal behaviour is the union of many imbalanced, curved, thin\-fringed operating regimes rather than a single blob; we state this structure as ten assumptions \(A1\-A10\), abbreviated Massive, Implicit, Imbalanced Multimodality \(MIIM\)\. We model the normal law with a jointly learned latent representation plus explicit Gaussian\-mixture mode clustering, scored in the latent rather than by a global density or a reconstruction residual, and evaluate under a deliberately fair protocol: raw point\-wise metrics with no point adjustment, a trivial\-detector difficulty split, prevalence\-matched F1, and train\-normal\-only calibration\. On three real CPS datasets \(WADI, HAI, SKAB\), the detector wins both the combined column and the difficult correlation/dynamics\-fault column on all three, reaching difficult\-subset AUROC 0\.831 on HAI, 0\.726 on WADI, and 0\.610 on SKAB\. The margin is largest on the two multimodal datasets the MIIM assumptions target and slimmest on the near\-unimodal one, tracking multimodality as the thesis predicts, and it holds against three deep detectors \(USAD, TranAD, GDN\) re\-computed with the same raw metrics, all of which collapse on the difficult subset\. The methodological contributions are the MIIM assumption set, the difficulty\-stratified fair protocol, and a latent\-only score that drops reconstruction because a flexible decoder rebuilds the hard faults faithfully\. ## Submission history From: Yehudit Aperstein \[[view email](https://arxiv.org/show-email/3cd69277/2607.06094)\] **\[v1\]**Tue, 7 Jul 2026 10:10:00 UTC \(604 KB\)
Similar Articles
Multi-Modal Anomaly Detection: A Survey
This survey paper provides a comprehensive overview of multi-modal anomaly detection, organizing methods based on normality and anomaly assumptions and discussing the role of foundation models in advancing the field.
Hybrid Latent-Structural Fusion (HLSF) for Cyber Anomaly Detection
Proposes Hybrid Latent-Structural Fusion (HLSF), a weighted anomaly fusion framework combining CP-APR structural anomaly scores with latent-space density scores from normalizing flows, improving cyber anomaly detection on real-world compromised user credentials data.
Rethinking Structural Anomaly Detection: From Decision Boundaries to Projection Operators
This paper rethinks structural anomaly detection by shifting from decision boundaries to projection operators onto the low-dimensional manifold of normal data, showing that projection-aligned methods outperform existing boundary-based and reconstruction-based approaches.
Modeling Spectral Energy Shifts in Spatio-Temporal Graph Anomaly Detection
Proposes a node-level spectral energy formulation for detecting camouflaged anomalies in graphs, extending to spatio-temporal settings with energy-driven message passing. Demonstrates effectiveness on large-scale benchmarks.
Towards Principled Continual Anomaly Detection: A Systematic Framework and Benchmark Scenarios
This paper introduces a systematic framework for designing reproducible continual anomaly detection benchmarks from tabular datasets, and provides five benchmark scenarios from three cybersecurity datasets.