Paper detail

Anomaly Detection with Neural Parsers That Never Reject

Reinforcement learning has recently shown promise as a technique for training an artificial neural network to parse sentences in some unknown format, through a body of work known as RL-GRIT. A key aspect of the RL-GRIT approach is that rather than explicitly inferring a grammar that describes the format, the neural network learns to perform various parsing actions (such as merging two tokens) over a corpus of sentences, with the goal of maximizing the estimated frequency of the resulting parse structures. This can allow the learning process to more easily explore different action choices, since a given choice may change the optimality of the parse (as expressed by the total reward), but will not result in the failure to parse a sentence. However, this also presents a limitation: because the trained neural network can successfully parse any sentence, it cannot be directly used to identify sentences that deviate from the format of the training sentences, i.e., that are anomalous. In this paper, we address this limitation by presenting procedures for extracting production rules from the neural network, and for using these rules to determine whether a given sentence is nominal or anomalous. When a sentence is anomalous, an attempt is made to identify the location of the anomaly. We empirically demonstrate that our approach is capable of grammatical inference and anomaly detection for both non-regular formats and those containing regions of high randomness/entropy. While a format with high randomness typically requires large sets of production rules, we propose a two pass grammatical inference method to generate parsimonious rule sets for such formats. By further improving parser learning, and leveraging the presented rule extraction and anomaly detection algorithms, one might begin to understand common errors, either benign or malicious, in practical formats.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.