Benchmarking Compact VLMs for Clip-Level Surveillance Anomaly Detection Under Weak Supervision
CCTV safety monitoring demands anomaly detectors combine reliable clip-level accuracy with predictable per-clip latency despite weak supervision. This work investigates compact vision-language models (VLMs) as practical detectors for this regime. A unified evaluation protocol standardizes preprocessing, prompting, dataset splits, metrics, and runtime settings to compare parameter-efficiently adapted compact VLMs against training-free VLM pipelines and weakly supervised baselines. Evaluation spans accuracy, precision, recall, F1, ROC-AUC, and average per-clip latency to jointly quantify detection quality and efficiency. With parameter-efficient adaptation, compact VLMs achieve performance on par with, and in several cases exceeding, established approaches while retaining competitive per-clip latency. Adaptation further reduces prompt sensitivity, producing more consistent behavior across prompt regimes under the shared protocol. These results show that parameter-efficient fine-tuning enables compact VLMs to serve as dependable clip-level anomaly detectors, yielding a favorable accuracy-efficiency trade-off within a transparent and consistent experimental setup.
Authors
- Grach Mkrtchian (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5802-5513)
- Mikhail G. Gorodnichev (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1739-9831)
- NIKITA A. VASILIEV (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0002-5559-470X)
- Kirill Kondrashov (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-5385-4636)
- Kirill Borodin (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-8203-1059)
- Ksenia Gladkova (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0008-9961-6708)
- Inna Larina (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-8477-150X)
Institutions
- Moscow Technical University of Communication and Informatics (RU)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of Imaging
- Published
- 2025-11-08
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging11110400
- Citations
- 1
- Primary Topic
- Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 2.48