ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Comparison of Anomaly Detection Methods on Event-Based Vision Sensor Data in a High Noise Environment.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Event-based vision sensors (EVSs) provide unique frequency analysis opportunities due to their event data output and high temporal resolution. Anomaly detection methods used in hyperspectral analysis can be used on the event frequency spectra to detect targets. However, the introduction of a strong, flickering interfering source can reduce the EVS sensitivity and obscure targets of interest. Previous work presented a method showing that targets could still be detected through an overwhelming source using frequency analysis, background suppression, and statistical filtering. This paper extends that research and compares the ability of five different eigenanalysis anomaly detection methods (principal component background suppression (PCBS) with peak threshold detection, Mahalanobis distance (MD) detector, complementary subspace detector (CSD), Reed-Xiaoli (RX) detector, and subspace Reed-Xiaoli (SSRX) detector) to detect targets in a high noise environment. The PCBS, MD, and CSD detectors performed well and were able to detect the targets through the overwhelming source. The PCBS detector had the best performance at low false-alarm rates (a > 400% detection probability increase at a false-alarm probability of 10
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.