Mitigating the Likelihood Paradox in Flow-based OOD Detection via Entropy Manipulation
About
Deep generative models that can tractably compute input likelihoods, including normalizing flows, often assign unexpectedly high likelihoods to out-of-distribution (OOD) inputs. We mitigate this likelihood paradox by manipulating input entropy based on semantic similarity, applying stronger perturbations to inputs that are less similar to an in-distribution memory bank. We provide a theoretical analysis showing that entropy control increases the expected log-likelihood gap between in-distribution and OOD samples in favor of the in-distribution, and we explain why the procedure works without any additional training of the density model. We then evaluate our method against likelihood-based OOD detectors on standard benchmarks and find consistent AUROC improvements over baselines, supporting our explanation.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OOD Detection | CIFAR-10 (IND) SVHN (OOD) | AUROC0.9916 | 91 | |
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | CIFAR-100 SVHN in-distribution out-of-distribution (test) | AUROC94.58 | 90 | |
| OOD Detection | CIFAR-100 IND SVHN OOD | AUROC (%)93.43 | 74 | |
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | FashionMNIST (ID) vs MNIST (OoD) | AUROC0.9424 | 61 | |
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | SVHN CIFAR-10 in-distribution out-of-distribution (test) | AUROC99.97 | 56 | |
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | CIFAR-10 (ID) vs Celeb-A (OOD) | AUROC99.93 | 55 | |
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | CIFAR-10 SVHN in-distribution out-of-distribution standard (test) | AUROC99.43 | 31 | |
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | SVHN → CIFAR-100 (test) | AUROC99.92 | 22 | |
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | SVHN (In) CelebA (Out) (test) | AUROC100 | 19 | |
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | MNIST (In) FashionMNIST (Out) (test) | AUROC1 | 19 |