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
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.
Code
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
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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