Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This research extends Concept Bottleneck Models to visual anomaly detection, successfully bridging pixel-level localization with semantically meaningful concept explanations. By combining a concept branch for high-level descriptions with a visual branch for spatial precision, the method achieves state-of-the-art performance while significantly improving user trust through human-interpretable feedback. The approach demonstrates that semantic grounding can enhance both explanation quality and model robustness in unsupervised settings without sacrificing detection accuracy.
Sources coveringarXiv, Latent Space
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Explainable Visual Anomaly Detection via Concept Bottleneck Models

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2511.20088v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: In recent years, VAD (Visual Anomaly Detection) has attracted significant attention due to its high interpretability, as it provides visual explanations by highlighting anomalous regions within an image. However, although these visual explanations can be helpful, they lack a direct and semantically meaningful interpretation for users. To address this limitation, we propose extending CBMs (Concept Bottleneck Models) to the VAD setting. By learning meaningful concepts, the network can provide human-interpretable descriptions of anomalies, offering a novel and more insightful way to explain them. Our main contributions are: (i) we introduce a concept-based framework for anomaly explanation by extending CBMs to the VAD setting for the first time; (ii) we evaluate multiple supervision regimes, ranging from supervised to unsupervised anomaly settings; (iii) we propose a dual-branch architecture that combines a CBM-based Concept branch for concept-level explanations with a Visual branch for pixel-level anomaly localization, bridging semantic and spatial interpretability. When evaluated across three well-established VAD benchmarks, our approach, Concept-Aware Visual Anomaly Detection (\ourmethod), achieves performance comparable to classic VAD methods (up to 0.97 I-AUROC on MVTec AD) while providing richer, concept-driven explanations. A user study (582 responses) shows that \ourmethod{} explanations are rated effective in 73.5% of cases (vs. 60.7% for the SOTA VLM-based explainer Anomaly-OV) and misleading in only 3.1% (vs. 11.7%). Beyond explanation quality, CBMs enable human-in-the-loop correction: concept-level interventions further boost detection in the challenging unsupervised setting, closing part of the gap to fully supervised performance.

Abstract:In recent years, VAD (Visual Anomaly Detection) has attracted significant attention due to its high interpretability, as it provides visual explanations by highlighting anomalous regions within an image. However, although these visual explanations can be helpful, they lack a direct and semantically meaningful interpretation for users. To address this limitation, we propose extending CBMs (Concept Bottleneck Models) to the VAD setting. By learning meaningful concepts, the network can provide human-interpretable descriptions of anomalies, offering a novel and more insightful way to explain them. Our main contributions are: (i) we introduce a concept-based framework for anomaly explanation by extending CBMs to the VAD setting for the first time; (ii) we evaluate multiple supervision regimes, ranging from supervised to unsupervised anomaly settings; (iii) we propose a dual-branch architecture that combines a CBM-based Concept branch for concept-level explanations with a Visual branch for pixel-level anomaly localization, bridging semantic and spatial interpretability. When evaluated across three well-established VAD benchmarks, our approach, Concept-Aware Visual Anomaly Detection (\ourmethod), achieves performance comparable to classic VAD methods (up to 0.97 I-AUROC on MVTec AD) while providing richer, concept-driven explanations. A user study (582 responses) shows that \ourmethod{} explanations are rated effective in 73.5% of cases (vs. 60.7% for the SOTA VLM-based explainer Anomaly-OV) and misleading in only 3.1% (vs. 11.7%). Beyond explanation quality, CBMs enable human-in-the-loop correction: concept-level interventions further boost detection in the challenging unsupervised setting, closing part of the gap to fully supervised performance.

Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2511.20088 [cs.CV]

(or arXiv:2511.20088v3 [cs.CV] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2511.20088 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 336 words

Related coverage