Papers › Rethinking Reconstruction-based Graph-Level Anomaly Detection: Limitations and a Simple Remedy
Rethinking Reconstruction-based Graph-Level Anomaly Detection: Limitations and a Simple Remedy
Sunwoo Kim, Soo Yong Lee, Fanchen Bu, Shinhwan Kang, Kyungho Kim, Jaemin Yoo, Kijung Shin
Graph autoencoders (Graph-AEs) learn representations of given graphs by aiming to accurately reconstruct them. A notable application of Graph-AEs is graph-level anomaly detection (GLAD), whose objective is to identify graphs with anomalous topological structures and/or node features compared to the majority of the graph population. Graph-AEs for GLAD regard a graph with a high mean reconstruction error (i.e. mean of errors from all node pairs and/or nodes) as anomalies. Namely, the methods rest on the assumption that they would better reconstruct graphs with similar characteristics to the majority. We, however, report non-trivial counter-examples, a phenomenon we call reconstruction flip, and highlight the limitations of the existing Graph-AE-based GLAD methods. Specifically, we empirically and theoretically investigate when this assumption holds and when it fails. Through our analyses, we further argue that, while the reconstruction errors for a given graph are effective features for GLAD, leveraging the multifaceted summaries of the reconstruction errors, beyond just mean, can further strengthen the features. Thus, we propose a novel and simple GLAD method, named MUSE. The key innovation of MUSE involves taking multifaceted summaries of reconstruction errors as graph features for GLAD. This surprisingly simple method obtains SOTA performance in GLAD, performing best overall among 14 methods across 10 datasets.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2410.20366")
Code
Syntology Ran 8 of 8 code samples harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 4 ran · our draft was wrong; 2 ran · fixture could not drive it; 2 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 2 samples from 1 repository, 2 ran; community: 3 samples from 1 repository, 3 ran; 3 identical to code first harvested elsewhere. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
8 samples harvested; 8 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 5 of the 8 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. Some samples are identical code Syntology first harvested from another repository; for those, this paper's copy is not located and its licence is not recorded. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
6b3abe06c8b61a63 · report
c25a2af8838a5048 · report
e88526ab8fc3ebc4 · report
162f6eae613812c6 · report
66e51521e0875290 · report
b22b48bb429101bb · report
1a6c10e37cb97711 · report
7daf2f4e6899de97 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections