Fault Mining Using Peer Group Analysis

  • David J. Weston
  • Niall M. Adams
  • Yoonseong Kim
  • David J. Hand
Conference paper
Part of the Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization book series (STUDIES CLASS)


There has been increasing interest in deploying data mining methods for fault detection. For the case where we have potentially large numbers of devices to monitor, we propose to use peer group analysis to identify faults. First, we identify the peer group of each device. This consists of other devices that have behaved similarly. We then monitor the behaviour of a device by measuring how well the peer group tracks the device. Should the device’s behaviour deviate strongly from its peer group we flag the behaviour as an outlier. An outlier is used to indicate the potential occurrence of a fault. A device exhibiting outlier behaviour from its peer group need not be an outlier to the population of devices. Indeed a device exhibiting behaviour typical for the population of devices might deviate sufficiently far from its peer group to be flagged as an outlier. We demonstrate the usefulness of this property for detecting faults by monitoring the data output from a collection of privately run weather stations across the UK.


Time Series Fault Detection Mahalanobis Distance Multiple Time Series Plastic Card 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We would like to express appreciation to Weather Underground, Inc. for use of their data. The work of David Weston was supported by grant number EP/C532589/1 from the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. The work of Yoonseong Kim was supported by the Korea Research Foundation Grant funded by the Korean Government (MOEHRD) (KRF-2006-612-D00100). The work of David Hand was partially supported by a Royal Society Wolfson Research Merit Award.


  1. Bolton RJ, Hand DJ (2001) Unsupervised profiling methods for fraud detection. In: Conference on Credit Scoring and Credit Control 7, Edinburgh, UK, 5-7 SeptGoogle Scholar
  2. Sharif M, Burn DH (2007) Improved k-nearest neighbor weather generating model. J Hydrolog Eng 12:42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Venkatasubramanian V, Rengaswamy R, Kavuri SN (2003a) A review of process fault detection and diagnosis Part II: Qualitative models and search strategies. Comput Chem Eng 27(3):313–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Venkatasubramanian V, Rengaswamy R, Kavuri SN, Yin K (2003b) A review of process fault detection and diagnosis Part III: Process history based methods. Comput Chem Eng 27(3):327–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Venkatasubramanian V, Rengaswamy R, Yin K, Kavuri SN (2003c) A review of process fault detection and diagnosis Part I: Quantitative model-based methods. Comput Chem Eng 27(3):293–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Weston DJ, Hand DJ, Adams NM, Whitrow C, Juszczak P (2008) Plastic card fraud detection using peer group analysis. Adv Data Anal Classif 2(1):45–62MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • David J. Weston
    • 1
  • Niall M. Adams
    • 2
  • Yoonseong Kim
    • 3
  • David J. Hand
    • 2
  1. 1.The Institute for Mathematical SciencesImperial College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsImperial College LondonLondonUK
  3. 3.Industrial Systems EngineeringYonsei UniversitySeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations