Organizations: School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310027, China · School of Computer Science and Technology(), , Hangzhou, 310018, China · Ningbo Innovation Center, Zhejiang University, Ningbo, China · Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China · College of Information Science & Electronic Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310027, China
Industrial anomaly detection faces significant challenges due to the scarcity of anomalous samples and the complexity of real-world anomalies. In this paper, we propose a foundation model-based anomaly synthesis pipeline (FMAS) that generates highly realistic anomalous samples without fine-tuning or class-specific training. Motivated by the distinct frequency-domain characteristics of anomalies, we introduce aWavelet Domain Attention Module (WDAM), which exploits adaptive sub-band processing to enhance anomaly feature extraction. The combination of FMAS and WDAM significantly improves anomaly detection sensitivity while maintaining computational efficiency. Comprehensive experiments on MVTec AD and VisA datasets demonstrate that WDAM, as a plug-and-play module, achieves substantial performance gains against existing baselines.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Qualitative results showing anomaly samples generated by the proposed FMAS on the MVTec AD dataset, with red contours highlighting the anomalous regions.
Figure 2: Visualization of anomaly saliency in the four wavelet sub-bands. The leftmost column presents the original images, the middle columns show the LL, LH, HL, and HH sub-bands, and the rightmost column illustrates the corresponding masks. Red dashed boxes indicate defect locations, and red solid boxes highlight magnified regions. All samples are drawn from the MVTec AD dataset.
Class
bottle
cable
capsule
carpet
grid
hazelnut
leather
metal nut
pill
screw
tile
toothbrush
transistor
wood
zipper
LL
0.69
0.84
0.90
0.72
0.76
0.76
0.69
0.78
0.81
0.75
0.83
0.80
0.81
0.70
0.70
LH
0.10
0.07
0.05
0.12
0.10
0.08
0.14
0.10
0.08
0.10
0.08
0.08
0.07
0.09
0.12
HL
0.10
0.07
0.04
0.13
0.10
0.08
0.13
0.09
0.08
0.10
0.08
0.10
0.08
0.17
0.14
HH
0.10
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.08
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.04
0.04
Table 1: Quantitative comparison of anomaly prominence across different wavelet sub-bands on our synthesized dataset based on the MVTec AD dataset. The reported values represent the relative degree of pixel-level change within each sub-band after anomaly synthesis, with higher values indicating greater relative variation.
Figure 3: Illustration of the proposed foundation model-based anomaly synthesis pipeline (FMAS).
Figure 4: The proposed Wavelet Domain Attention Module (WDAM) processes input feature maps through a frequency-aware attention mechanism. First, WDAM decomposes the spatial features into multiple frequency sub-bands using Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT). An adaptive attention mechanism then selectively enhances or suppresses features in each sub-band based on their relevance to anomaly detection. Finally, the refined frequency components are reconstructed back into the spatial domain via Inverse Discrete Wavelet Transform (IDWT), effectively preserving critical defect-related patterns while suppressing noise.
Metric
GLASS ( Chen et al., 2024 )
RealNet ( Zhang et al., 2024 )
Ours
FID ↓
177.51
69.64
56.99
LPIPS ↓
0.280
0.147
0.130
Table 2: Quantitative results of anomaly image realism between our method and the alternative anomaly synthesis approaches on the MVTec-AD dataset.
Figure 5: (a) The architecture of CutPaste with the proposed WDAM, wherein Bottleneck* denotes a modified bottleneck block incorporating WDAM, as elaborated in (b). The elements enclosed within the red dashed box indicate the additional components introduced in comparison to the original bottleneck configuration.
Category
CutPaste
+FMAS
+FM
+WDAM (Final Model)
Bottle
( 100.0 , 68.06, 39.84)
( 100.0 , 81.18, 66.07)
( 100.0 , 83.73 , 71.35 )
( 100.0 , 86.82 , 71.29 )
Cable
(88.44, 80.39, 43.13)
( 94.10 , 87.80 , 59.77)
(91.55, 85.48, 62.97 )
( 97.91 , 90.79 , 74.14 )
Capsule
( 100.0 , 89.67, 65.91)
(96.38, 92.58 , 74.94)
(96.66, 91.04, 75.15 )
( 97.50 , 93.26 , 77.39 )
Carpet
(81.77, 88.02, 23.36)
( 92.12 , 95.97 , 68.20 )
(91.59, 95.59, 62.93)
( 98.66 , 96.70 , 81.25 )
Grid
(90.64, 77.65, 56.42)
(99.14, 92.08 , 68.69 )
( 99.16 , 90.69 , 63.96)
( 99.89 , 88.78, 66.29 )
Hazelnut
(98.58, 84.77, 69.51)
( 99.48 , 92.31 , 82.12 )
(98.89, 91.40, 73.78)
( 99.73 , 92.54 , 84.02 )
Table 3: Evaluation results of CutPaste and our variants on MVTec AD dataset, with image-level AUROC, pixel-level AUROC, and PRO metrics. FM is short for foreground mask. Bold and underlined indicate the best and second-best results, respectively.
Category
CutPaste
+FMAS
+FM
+WDAM (Final Model)
EawT ( Du et al., 2024 )
AST ( Rudolph et al., 2023 )
candle
(94.7, 93.5)
(93.1, 94.8)
(94.3, 95.8 )
( 98.0 , 93.4)
(86.8, 98.6 )
( 97.1 , 93.6)
capsules
(84.4, 83.9 )
(72.7, 74.7)
(80.7, 79.0)
( 85.2 , 77.7)
( 91.2 , 99.3 )
(81.5, 80.1)
cashew
(94.9, 88.3)
(90.2, 90.5)
( 95.3 , 96.0 )
( 95.6 , 92.7 )
(88.4, 81.8)
(93.0, 86.3)
chewinggum
(97.7, 97.9 )
(97.5, 97.2)
( 99.1 , 93.3)
(99.0, 85.3)
(98, 98.8 )
( 99.3 , 87.7)
fryum
(93.9, 97.0 )
(90.4, 88.1)
(95.8, 93.9)
( 97.1 , 95.4 )
( 97.5 , 95.4 )
(96.8, 79.3)
macaroni1
(85.1, 78.2)
(81.9, 90.2)
( 97.0 , 91.5 )
( 95.6 , 91.0)
(89.4, 99.9 )
(75.0, 89.7)
Table 4: Evaluation results of CutPaste, its variants with different modifications, and the other competitors on VisA dataset, with image-level and pixel-level AUROC metrics
Category
CFLOW-AD ( Gudovskiy et al., 2022 )
MSTUnet ( Jiang et al., 2022 )
MambaAD ( He et al., 2024 )
DRAEM ( Zavrtanik et al., 2021 )
+SSPCAB ( Ristea et al., 2022 )
Final Model
Bottle
(99.0, 96.8)
( 100.0 , 99.0 )
( 100.0 , 98.8 )
( 99.5 , 98.5)
(98.4, 98.8 )
(99.2, 98.4)
Cable
( 97.6 , 93.5)
(91.4, 89.9)
( 98.8 , 95.8)
(95.3, 94.4)
(96.9, 96.0 )
(97.4, 96.5 )
Capsule
( 99.0 , 93.4)
(98.4, 95.7 )
(94.4, 98.4 )
(96.6, 90.8)
( 99.3 , 93.1)
(97.0, 91.6)
Carpet
(99.3, 97.7)
( 99.9 , 98.3 )
( 99.8 , 99.2 )
(97.9, 95.3)
(98.2, 95.0)
(99.6, 95.8)
Grid
( 99.0 , 96.1)
( 100.0 , 99.7 )
( 100.0 , 99.2)
( 100.0 , 99.7 )
( 100.0 , 99.5 )
( 100.0 , 99.7 )
Hazelnut
( 99.0 , 96.7)
( 100.0 , 99.3)
( 100.0 , 99.0)
( 100.0 , 99.7 )
( 100.0 , 99.8 )
( 100.0 , 99.6)
Table 5: Image-level AUROC and pixel-Level AUROC results on the MVTec AD Dataset. Comparison of DRAEM ( Zavrtanik et al., 2021 ) , DRAEM with the proposed WDAM, and other methods, including CFLOW-AD ( Gudovskiy et al., 2022 ) , MSTUnet ( Jiang et al., 2022 ) , MambaAD ( He et al., 2024 ) and DRAEM+SSPCAB ( Ristea et al., 2022 )
Dataset
THFR ( Guo et al., 2023 )
RD++ ( Tien et al., 2023 )
Dinomaly ViT-B ( Guo et al., 2025 )
PatchCore
PatchCore Ensemble
Final Model
MVTec AD
(99.2, 98.2, 95.0)
(99.4, 98.3 , 95.0)
( 99.6 , 98.4 , 94.8)
(99.1, 98.1, 97.4)
( 99.5 , 98.2, 97.6 )
(99.0, 98.3 , 97.7 )
Table 6: Evaluation results of PatchCore, its variants with different modifications, and other methods, including THFR ( Guo et al., 2023 ) , RD++ ( Tien et al., 2023 ) , and Dinomaly ViT-B ( Guo et al., 2025 ) , on the MVTec AD dataset using image-level AUROC, pixel-level AUROC, and PRO metrics.
Figure 6: Qualitative results of CutPaste ( Li et al., 2021 ) and our method on MVTec AD dataset. From top to down, original image, ground-truth mask, detection heatmap of CutPaste, and detection heatmap of our method.
Figure 7: Qualitative results of CutPaste ( Li et al., 2021 ) and our method on VisA dataset. From top to down, original image, ground-truth mask, detection heatmap of CutPaste, and detection heatmap of our method.
Dataset
FMAS
WDAM
Metrics
MVTec AD
(93.23, 82.34, 57.51)
✓
( 96.54 , 86.88 , 67.69 )
✓
(96.20, 84.91, 66.35)
✓
✓
( 98.00 , 88.28 , 72.04 )
VisA
(90.68, 89.68, 65.65)
✓
( 93.86 , 93.37 , 75.82 )
Table 7: Module-level ablation results on MVTec AD and VisA dataset, based on the CutPaste.
Layer1
Layer2
Layer3
Layer4
Metrics
(96.54, 86.88, 67.69)
✓
( 98.00 , 88.28 , 72.04 )
✓
✓
( 97.92 , 87.99 , 71.70)
✓
✓
✓
(97.39, 87.92, 72.09 )
✓
✓
✓
✓
(97.45, 87.70, 71.60)
Table 8: Ablation analysis of WDAM integration within CutPaste on the MVTec AD dataset.
Metrics
WideResNet50-2
+WDAM
Param. (MB)
67.40
67.59
FLOPs (G)
29.92
29.94
Inference Time (ms)
5.71
7.35
I-AUROC (%)
96.54
98.00
Table 9: Comparison of WideResNet50-2 and WideResNet50-2+WDAM in terms of model complexity, efficiency, and accuracy.
Class
bottle
cable
capsule
carpet
grid
hazelnut
leather
metal nut
pill
screw
tile
toothbrush
transistor
wood
zipper
LL
0,0,1
0,1,0
0,1,1
0,1,0
0,1,1
0,1,0
0,1,0
0,1,1
0,0,1
0,1,0
0,1,0
0,1,0
1,1,1
0,1,1
0,1,0
LH
1,1,1
1,0,0
1,0,1
0,0,0
1,0,0
1,0,1
1,0,1
1,0,0
0,0,1
0,0,0
1,0,0
1,0,1
1,0,1
1,0,0
1,0,0
HL
1,1,0
0,0,0
1,1,0
0,1,0
0,1,0
0,0,0
1,1,0
0,1,0
0,1,0
0,0,0
0,0,1
0,0,0
1,1,1
0,0,0
0,0,1
HH
0,0,0
0,0,0
1,0,0
0,0,1
1,0,0
0,0,1
0,0,0.8
0,0,1
0,0,0
0,1,0
1,0,1
1,0,1
0,0,0
0,0,0
1,0,0
Table 10: Average wavelet sub-bands weights learned by the WDAM on the MVTec AD dataset. Each sample is assigned three groups of weights (LL, LH, HL, HH), representing the relative contributions of the four wavelet sub-bands to anomaly detection. For each class, the three comma-separated values correspond to the three WDAM modules integrated sequentially into three bottleneck layers, as illustrated in Figure 5 . Values are averaged across all samples within each module.
Industrial anomaly detection (AD) is characterized by an abundance of normal images but a scarcity of anomalous ones. Although numerous few-shot anomaly synthesis methods have been proposed to augment anomalous data for downstream AD tasks, most existing approaches require time-consuming training and struggle to learn distributions that are faithful to real anomalies, thereby restricting the efficacy of AD models trained on such data. To address these limitations, we propose a training-free few-shot anomaly generation method, namely O2MAG, which leverages the self-attention in One reference anomalous image to synthesize More realistic anomalies, supporting effective downstream anomaly detection. Specifically, O2MAG manipulates three parallel diffusion processes via self-attention grafting and incorporates the anomaly mask to mitigate foreground-background query confusion, synthesizing text-guided anomalies that closely adhere to real anomalous distributions. To bridge the semantic gap between the encoded anomaly text prompts and the true anomaly semantics, Anomaly-Guided Optimization is further introduced to align the synthesis process with the target anomalous distribution, steering the generation toward realistic and text-consistent anomalies. Moreover, to mitigate faint anomaly synthesis inside anomaly masks, Dual-Attention Enhancement is adopted during generation to reinforce both self- and cross-attention on masked regions. Extensive experiments validate the effectiveness of O2MAG, demonstrating its superior performance over prior state-of-the-art methods on downstream AD tasks.
Haoxiang Rao, Zhao Wang, Chenyang Si +4
Nanjing University · China Mobile Zijin Innovation Institute · Shandong University of Science and Technology
Time series anomaly detection is a crucial task in various domains, including finance, healthcare, and industry. However, existing methods often struggle to generalize across different datasets, especially when anomalies are subtle or context-dependent. To solve this issue, we introduce ChronosAD, a novel architecture for anomaly detection that uses a time series foundation model as a feature extractor. Specifically, it employs a two-stage pipeline: first, it uses the foundation model to extract embeddings for each time series in a zero-shot manner. Then, a custom-developed Temporal Block, composed of Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory (BiLSTM) and Multi-Head Attention, refines these embeddings to capture temporal dependencies and highlight salient patterns. Unlike previous approaches, our model requires minimal task-specific tuning and demonstrates robust generalization across a wide range of domains, including industrial, medical, cyber-physical, and automotive systems. Extensive experiments on 11 benchmarks show that ChronosAD outperforms existing methods by 4.72% in AUC and 6.60% in AP on average. The source code is available at https://github.com/intelligolabs/ChronosAD.
Uzair Khan, Luigi Capogrosso, Francesco Biondani +4
University of Verona · Interdisciplinary Transformation University of Austria · ETH Zurich
Industrial anomaly detection (AD) is bottlenecked by the scarcity of anomalous samples, making high-fidelity anomaly synthesis crucial for improving downstream performance. However, existing methods either rely on scarce real anomaly references or auxiliary data, while lacking complex reasoning and iterative optimization capabilities for generating realistic defects in open-set scenarios. To address these challenges, we propose CORE, a cost-efficient and training-free prompt optimization framework based on Large Multimodal Models (LMMs), which unifies zero-shot and one-shot anomaly synthesis. CORE first introduces an Anomaly Context Grounding module to transform sparse user context into defect-aware generation context, which is subsequently instantiated as structured anomaly prompts that disentangle normal-region preservation from anomaly-specific variation, enabling controllable and faithful defect generation. Furthermore, CORE autonomously refines prompts through a self-supervised contrast-and-reflect mechanism. This design empowers general-purpose LMMs to synthesize realistic anomalies under both zero-shot and one-shot settings without task-specific training. Extensive experiments on MVTec-AD and VisA demonstrate that CORE synthesizes realistic and diverse anomalies, yielding superior improvements in downstream AD performance. Furthermore, its model-agnostic and plug-and-play paradigm enables effortless integration with diverse LMMs, facilitating adaptation to unseen open-set scenarios.
Haoxiang Rao, Fang Zhao, Zhao Wang +3
School of Intelligence Science and Technology, Nanjing University · China Mobile Zijin Innovation Institute