Papers › Impact Assessment of Missing Data in Model Predictions for Earth Observation Applications

Impact Assessment of Missing Data in Model Predictions for Earth Observation Applications

21 Mar 2024arXiv:2403.14297archive 2025-07-28

Francisco Mena, Diego Arenas, Marcela Charfuelan, Marlon Nuske, Andreas Dengel

Earth observation (EO) applications involving complex and heterogeneous data sources are commonly approached with machine learning models. However, there is a common assumption that data sources will be persistently available. Different situations could affect the availability of EO sources, like noise, clouds, or satellite mission failures. In this work, we assess the impact of missing temporal and static EO sources in trained models across four datasets with classification and regression tasks. We compare the predictive quality of different methods and find that some are naturally more robust to missing data. The Ensemble strategy, in particular, achieves a prediction robustness up to 100%. We evidence that missing scenarios are significantly more challenging in regression than classification tasks. Finally, we find that the optical view is the most critical view when it is missing individually.

PaperPDFCode

Code

fmenat/missingviews-study-eo officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHubpytorch report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

ClassificationClassification on Time Series with Missing DataCrop ClassificationEarth ObservationMULTI-VIEW LEARNINGSensor Fusionregression

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

TaskDatasetModelMetricValueRank at snapshotLeaderboardReport
Crop Classification CropHarvest - Global Feature Gated Fusion Average Accuracy 0.849 #1 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Crop Classification CropHarvest - Global Input Fusion Average Accuracy 0.847 #2 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Crop Classification CropHarvest - Global Ensemble strategy Average Accuracy 0.828 #3 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Crop Classification CropHarvest multicrop - Global Input Fusion Average Accuracy 0.738 #1 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Crop Classification CropHarvest multicrop - Global Feature Gated Fusion Average Accuracy 0.734 #2 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Crop Classification CropHarvest multicrop - Global Ensemble strategy Average Accuracy 0.715 #3 of 3 Archive leaderboard report

Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections