Papers › Mind the gap: an experimental evaluation of imputation of missing values techniques in...

Mind the gap: an experimental evaluation of imputation of missing values techniques in time series

15 Jan 2020Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 2020 1archive 2025-07-28

Mourad Khayati, Alberto Lerner, Zakhar Tymchenko, Philippe Cudré-Mauroux

Recording sensor data is seldom a perfect process. Failures in power, communication or storage can leave occasional blocks of data missing, affecting not only real-time monitoring but also compromising the quality of near- and off-line data analysis. Several recovery (imputation) algorithms have been proposed to replace missing blocks. Unfortunately, little is known about their relative performance, as existing comparisons are limited to either a small subset of relevant algorithms or to very few datasets or often both. Drawing general conclusions in this case remains a challenge. In this paper, we empirically compare twelve recovery algorithms using a novel benchmark. All but two of the algorithms were re-implemented in a uniform test environment. The benchmark gathers ten different datasets, which collectively represent a broad range of applications. Our benchmark allows us to fairly evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each approach, and to recommend the best technique on a use-case basis. It also allows us to identify the limitations of the current body of algorithms and suggest future research directions.

PaperPDFCode

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

ImputationMissing ValuesTime SeriesTime Series Analysis

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

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