Probes the ability of one-class anomaly detection algorithms to identify incipient engine faults in real-world, multivariate vehicle sensor telemetry. It specifically evaluates cross-vehicle generalization and robustness to distributional shifts in normal operating conditions across a commercial fleet. Use when the user wants to benchmark on EngineAD, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports F1-score (anomaly class).
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Enginead Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-enginead-eval)
---
name: enginead-eval
description: Probes the ability of one-class anomaly detection algorithms to identify incipient engine faults in real-world, multivariate vehicle sensor telemetry. It specifically evaluates cross-vehicle generalization and robustness to distributional shifts in normal operating conditions across a commercial fleet. Use when the user wants to benchmark on EngineAD, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports F1-score (anomaly class).
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2603.25955
bibtex_key: [REDACTED]
confidence: high
---
# enginead-eval
> EngineAD: A Real-World Vehicle Engine Anomaly Detection Dataset — Hojjati et al. (2026) (arXiv:2603.25955, 2026)
## What this evaluates
Probes the ability of one-class anomaly detection algorithms to identify incipient engine faults in real-world, multivariate vehicle sensor telemetry. It specifically evaluates cross-vehicle generalization and robustness to distributional shifts in normal operating conditions across a commercial fleet.
## Datasets
- **EngineAD** — total ?; splits: train (-1), test (-1); repo https://github.com/Armanfard-Lab/EngineAD
## Metrics
- `F1-score (anomaly class)` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Harmonic mean of precision and recall computed exclusively on the anomaly class (positive class). Designed to balance false positives and false negatives in highly imbalanced fault detection scenarios.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Flattened 1D feature vector of shape (2400,) representing a 300-timestep multivariate time-series segment across 8 principal components, standardized using a scaler fitted solely on training data.
**Output**: Binary classification label (0=normal, 1=anomaly) derived from model anomaly scores, typically thresholded at the 95th percentile of training normal scores for scoring-based methods.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_f1_anomaly(y_true, y_pred):
tp = np.sum((y_true == 1) & (y_pred == 1))
fp = np.sum((y_true == 0) & (y_pred == 1))
fn = np.sum((y_true == 1) & (y_pred == 0))
precision = tp / (tp + fp) if (tp + fp) > 0 else 0.0
recall = tp / (tp + fn) if (tp + fn) > 0 else 0.0
f1 = 2 * precision * recall / (precision + recall) if (precision + recall) > 0 else 0.0
return f1
```
## Common pitfalls
- The test set is not a simple random split; it concatenates 30% of normal segments with all available anomaly segments, creating an artificial class balance that differs from the raw data distribution.
- Thresholds for distance/scoring methods are fixed at the 95th percentile of the training normal data scores, not tuned on the test set, which heavily constrains the precision/recall trade-off.
- Input segments are flattened into 1D vectors, discarding temporal structure, which may unfairly disadvantage sequence-aware or recurrent models compared to classical point-wise detectors.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Performance was measured using the F1-score calculated specifically for the anomaly class, as this metric provides a robust assessment of a detector’s efficacy in highly imbalanced and critical tasks.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{hojjati2026enginead,
title={EngineAD: A Real-World Vehicle Engine Anomaly Detection Dataset},
author={Hojjati et al. (2026)},
year={2026},
note={arXiv:2603.25955}
}
```
- arXiv: 2603.25955