Journals / International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering / 2021 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1

A hybrid modified deep learning data imputation method for numeric data sets

Pages
6–11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results show that in most cases, the RF-DLI approach has better imputation performance than the other techniques mentioned.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Missing data is a major problem in terms of both machine learning and data mining methods.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Like most of these methods do not work with missing data, negative results may occur on the performance of the working ones, also.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results show that in most cases, the RF-DLI approach has better imputation performance than the other techniques mentioned.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Missing data is a major problem in terms of both machine learning and data mining methods. Like most of these methods do not work with missing data, negative results may occur on the performance of the working ones, also. Imputation is a data preprocessing method used to replace missing data with appropriate values. This study aims at developing a hybrid modified imputation method based on deep learning approach. For this purpose, we use Random Forest and Datawig deep learning imputation (called RF-DLI) methods together. Datawig is a deep learning-based library that supports missing value imputation for all types of data. RF-DLI approach includes the following steps to impute missing data. First, the importance of each attribute of the data set is determined with Random Forest (RF). Second, the most important 50% of the attributes are selected. Finally, each missing value is imputed with datawig (DLI) using these most important attributes. The study uses six real-world data sets from different fields with 30% missing data. The imputation performance of RF-DLI is compared to K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), Multiple Imputation by Chained Equations (MICE), MEAN imputation, and Principle Component Analysis (PCA) imputation approaches in terms of Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), and R-square (R2) evaluation metrics. The results show that in most cases, the RF-DLI approach has better imputation performance than the other techniques mentioned.

🔖

Cite This Article

PEKER, N., KUBAT, C. (2021). A hybrid modified deep learning data imputation method for numeric data sets. International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1, 6–11. https://ajindex.com/articles/199027

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. P. D. Allison, “Missing data techniques for structural equation modeling,” Journal of abnormal psychology, 112(4), 545, 2003
  2. T. D. Pigott, “A review of methods for missing data,” Educational research and evaluation, 7(4), 353-383, 2001
  3. M. Amiri, R. Jensen, “Missing data imputation using fuzzy-rough methods,” Neurocomputing, 205, 152-164, 2016
  4. G. Rahman, Z. Islam, “A decision tree-based missing value imputation technique for data pre-processing,” In Proceedings of the Ninth Australasian Data Mining Conference-Volume 121, pp. 41- 50, Dec. 2011
  5. H. Wang, S. Wang, “Mining incomplete survey data through classification,” Knowledge and information systems, 24(2), 221- 233, 2010
  6. A. Farhangfar, L. Kurgan, J. Dy, “Impact of imputation of missing values on classification error for discrete data,” Pattern Recognition, 41(12), 3692-3705, 2008
  7. D.R. Rubin, “Inference and missing data,” Biometrika, 63(3), 581- 592, 1976
  8. R. J. Little, D. B. Rubin, “Statistical analysis with missing data,” Vol. 793, John Wiley & Sons., 2019
  9. S. Dray, J. Josse, “Principal component analysis with missing values: a comparative survey of methods,” Plant Ecology, 216(5), 657-667, 2015
  10. S. A. Imtiaz, S. L. Shah, S. Narasimhan, “Missing data treatment using iterative PCA and data reconciliation,” IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 37(9), 197-202, 2004
  11. S. V. Buuren, K. Groothuis-Oudshoorn, “mice: Multivariate imputation by chained equations in R,” Journal of statistical software, 1-68, 2010
  12. K. Lakshminarayan, S. A. Harp, T. Samad, “Imputation of missing data in industrial databases,” Applied intelligence, 11(3), 259-275, 1999
  13. O. Troyanskaya, M. Cantor, G. Sherlock, G, P. Brown, T. Hastie, R. Tibshirani, R. B. Altman,”Missing value estimation methods for DNA microarrays,” Bioinformatics, 17(6), 520-525, 2001
  14. L. Folguera, J. Zupan, D. Cicerone, J. F. Magallanes, “Selforganizing maps for imputation of missing data in incomplete data matrices,” Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 143, 146-151, 2015
  15. K. J. Nishanth, V. Ravi, “Probabilistic neural network based categorical data imputation,” Neurocomputing, 218, 17-25, 2016
  16. B. M. Patil, R. C. Joshi, D. Toshniwal, “Missing value imputation based on k-mean clustering with weighted distance,” In International Conference on Contemporary Computing, pp. 600-609, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Aug. 2010
  17. N. Ankaiah, V. Ravi, “A novel soft computing hybrid for data imputatio