Video anomaly detection (VAD) identifies deviations from normal patterns, but such deviations do not necessarily correspond to safety-critical events. We focus on human-centered emergencies and violence and investigate whether motion-based anomaly discrimination reflects task-relevant motion information or observation-quality differences arising from person detection, pose estimation, and tracking. We introduce an observation-quality-aware evaluation framework that combines quality diagnostics, quality balancing, motion orthogonalization, and robustness analyses. On human-centered categories of UCF-Crime, quality-only features match or exceed the discrimination of multi-cue motion in the original cohort, revealing a strong observation-quality shortcut. After cardinality matching brings all 11 measured quality variables below a prespecified marginal balance threshold, multi-cue motion consistently outperforms quality-only features across Logistic Regression, Random Forest, and RBF-SVM, yielding ROC-AUC gains of 0.046-0.141. Because nonlinear quality-only prediction remains above chance after matching, we interpret this result as additional discrimination beyond measured marginal quality rather than as evidence of quality-free or causal motion understanding. These findings show that high VAD performance should not be interpreted as evidence of abnormal-motion modeling without auditing the reliability of the person-observation pipeline. Our study provides a systematic protocol for evaluating observation-quality shortcuts and for assessing whether motion-based discrimination survives explicit control of detection, pose-estimation, and tracking reliability.

翻译：暂无翻译