• The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.603-608
• /
• 2024

Nonresponse and missing values are caused by sample dropouts and avoidance of answers to surveys. In this case, problems with the possibility of information loss and biased reasoning arise, and a replacement of missing values with appropriate values is required. In this paper, as an alternative to missing values imputation, we compare several replacement methods, which use mean, linear regression, random forest, K-nearest neighbor, autoencoder and denoising autoencoder based on deep learning. These methods of imputing missing values are explained, and each method is compared by using continuous simulation data and real data. The comparison results confirm that in most cases, the performance of the random forest imputation method and the denoising autoencoder imputation method are better than the others.

• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.29 no.4
• /
• pp.39-46
• /
• 2024

Many researchers make efforts to evaluate water quality using various models. Such models require a dataset without missing values, but in real world, most datasets include missing values for various reasons. Simple deletion of samples having missing value(s) could distort distribution of the underlying data and pose a significant risk of biasing the model's inference when the missing mechanism is not MCAR. In this study, to explore the most appropriate technique for handing missing values in water quality data, several imputation techniques were experimented based on existing KNN and MICE imputation with/without the generative neural network model, Autoencoder(AE) and Denoising Autoencoder(DAE). The results shows that KNN and MICE combined imputation without generative networks provides the closest estimated values to the true values. When evaluating binary classification models based on support vector machine and ensemble algorithms after applying the combined imputation technique to the observed water quality dataset with missing values, it shows better performance in terms of Accuracy, F1 score, RoC-AuC score and MCC compared to those evaluated after deleting samples having missing values.