Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Did We Actually Fix It? An Independent Adversarial Stress-Test of Post-Point-Adjustment Evaluation Metrics for Time-Series Anomaly Detection

Point-adjustment (PA), for years the default scoring protocol in time-series anomaly detection (TSAD), was shown by Kim et al. (2022) to award near-perfect F1 to random anomaly scores. The field adopted a suite of replacement metrics (PA%K, range-based precision/recall, affiliation precision/recall, and Volume-Under-the-Surface, VUS, ROC/PR). We ask, independently and adversarially, whether these resist no-skill detectors on real benchmarks, and find the answer turns entirely on one overlooked variable: N, the number of random attempts an adversary reports the best of. Under a single honest run (N=1), not one replacement metric is gameable on any of six benchmarks (UCR, SMD, SMAP, MSL, NA...

AuthorsZongye Lyu
Primary categorystat.ML
Published12 July 2026
Last updated at source19 July 2026
stat.MLcs.LG
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/7ccbbb6e-1640-4cfe-8847-2c2d5d06bbd6" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Popularity, last 2 days

0 now. Counts as reported by the source, snapshotted daily by Silytics.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 18 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.