Adaptive Machine Learning Frameworks for Data Quality Monitoring: From Anomaly Detection to Continuous Pipeline Validation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15662/IJRAI.2022.0501007Keywords:
Data Quality Monitoring, Anomaly Detection, Local Outlier Factor, Isolation Forest, Concept Drift, Data Validation, Machine Learning Pipelines, Outlier Detection, Streaming Data, Data IntegrityAbstract
Data quality monitoring (DQM) has become a critical requirement in modern data-driven systems, especially in machine learning (ML) pipelines where poor-quality, inconsistent, or drifting data can directly degrade model performance, reliability, interpretability, and fairness. As organizations increasingly rely on automated decision-making systems, even subtle data anomalies such as distributional shifts, missing-value spikes, schema mismatches, or feature correlation changes can propagate downstream and produce significant operational and reputational risks. Traditional rule-based validation approaches, including static thresholds, manual audits, and predefined integrity constraints, are often inadequate in dynamic, large-scale, and streaming environments where data characteristics evolve continuously. Consequently, machine learning techniques have emerged as adaptive and scalable solutions for automated data quality monitoring, enabling systems to detect complex anomalies, context-sensitive outliers, and temporal drift patterns without exhaustive manual specification. This article surveys key ML-driven approaches to DQM, including statistical anomaly detection, density-based outlier detection, isolation-based methods, and concept drift detection frameworks, while also examining their integration into continuous ML pipelines. Foundational techniques such as the Local Outlier Factor (LOF) and Isolation Forest are discussed alongside modern validation architectures that embed automated profiling, distribution comparison, and alerting mechanisms into production workflows. By synthesizing algorithmic foundations, system design principles, and operational best practices, this article presents a structured framework for implementing robust ML-based DQM systems capable of maintaining data integrity in complex, high-volume environments.
References
1. Breunig, M. M., Kriegel, H. P., Ng, R. T., & Sander, J. (2000). LOF: Identifying density-based local outliers. ACM SIGMOD Record, 29(2), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1145/335191.335388
2. Liu, F. T., Ting, K. M., & Zhou, Z. H. (2012). Isolation-based anomaly detection. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data, 6(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1145/2133360.2133363
3. Gama, J., Žliobaitė, I., Bifet, A., Pechenizkiy, M., & Bouchachia, A. (2014). A survey on concept drift adaptation. ACM Computing Surveys, 46(4), Article 44. https://doi.org/10.1145/2523813
4. Cai, L., & Zhu, Y. (2015). The challenges of data quality and data quality assessment in the big data era. Data Science Journal, 14, 2. https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2015-002
5. Chandola, V., Banerjee, A., & Kumar, V. (2009). Anomaly detection: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys, 41(3), Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1145/1541880.1541882
6. Sculley, D., Holt, G., Golovin, D., et al. (2015). Hidden technical debt in machine learning systems. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 28. https://papers.nips.cc/paper/5656-hidden-technical-debt-in-machine-learning-systems
7. Domingos, P., & Hulten, G. (2000). Mining high-speed data streams. Proceedings of the Sixth ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. https://doi.org/10.1145/347090.347107
8. Srikanth Chakravarthy Vankayala. (2016). Reframing Enterprise Quality Engineering: The Emergence of Predictive and Cognitive Automation. Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 3(2), 291–304. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17839512
9. Santhosh Reddy BasiReddy. (2021). Reframing CRM Intelligence Through Knowledge Graph–Based Relationship Modeling. In International Journal of Scientific Research & Engineering Trends (Vol. 7, Number 3). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18014115
10. Goldstein, M., & Uchida, S. (2016). A comparative evaluation of unsupervised anomaly detection algorithms for multivariate data. PLOS ONE, 11(4), e0152173. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152173
11. Santhosh Reddy BasiReddy. (2021). Architectural Foundations for AI-Driven Intelligent Automation in Salesforce Ecosystems. In International Journal of Scientific Research & Engineering Trends (Vol. 7, Number 1). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18014554
12. Dean, J., & Ghemawat, S. (2008). MapReduce: Simplified data processing on large clusters. https://doi.org/10.1145/1327452.1327492
13. Wang, L., et al. (2020). WUKONG: A scalable and locality-enhanced framework for serverless parallel computing. https://doi.org/10.1145/3419111.3421286
14. Singh, S., & Chana, I. (2015). QoS-aware autonomic resource management in cloud computing: A systematic review. https://doi.org/10.1145/2843889
15. Verma, A., Cherkasova, L., & Campbell, R. (2011). ARIA: Automatic resource inference and allocation for MapReduce environments. https://doi.org/10.1145/1998582.1998637
16. Breck, E., Polyzotis, N., Roy, S., Whang, S. E., & Zinkevich, M. (2019). Data validation for machine learning. Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Machine Learning and Systems (MLSys).





