Cited by 257Time Series Analysis and ForecastingGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image SynthesisStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference

E²GAN: End-to-End Generative Adversarial Network for Multivariate Time Series Imputation

Luo, Yonghong, Zhang, Ying, Cai, Xiangrui, Yuan, Xiaojie·2019·Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

The missing values, appear in most of multivariate time series, prevent advanced analysis of multivariate time series data. Existing imputation approaches try to deal with missing values by deletion, statistical imputation, machine learning based imputation and generative imputation. However, these methods are either incapable of dealing with temporal information or multi-stage. This paper proposes an end-to-end generative model E²GAN to impute missing values in multivariate time series. With the help of the discriminative loss and the squared error loss, E²GAN can impute the incomplete time series by the nearest generated complete time series at one stage. Experiments on multiple real-world datasets show that our model outperforms the baselines on the imputation accuracy and achieves state-of-the-art classification/regression results on the downstream applications. Additionally, our method also gains better time efficiency than multi-stage method on the training of neural networks.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.24963/ijcai.2019/429

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. Evrim Acar, Daniel M Dunlavy, Tamara G Kolda, and Morten Mørup. Scalable ten- sor factorizations with missing data. In Proceedings of the 2010 SIAM international conference on data mining, pages 701-712. SIAM, 2010.
  2. Arjovsky et al., 2017] Martin Arjovsky, Soumith Chintala, and Léon Bottou. Wasserstein generative adversarial net- works. In ICML, pages 214-223, 2017.
  3. Mathias Berglund, Tapani Raiko, Mikko Honkala, Leo Kärkkäinen, Akos Vetek, and Juha T Karhunen. Bidirectional recurrent neural networks as gen- erative models. In Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems, pages 856-864, 2015.
  4. George EP Box, Gwilym M Jenkins, Gre- gory C Reinsel, and Greta M Ljung. Time series analysis: forecasting and control. John Wiley & Sons, 2015.
  5. Wei Cao, Dong Wang, Jian Li, Hao Zhou, Lei Li, and Yitan Li. Brits: Bidirectional recurrent impu- tation for time series. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pages 6776-6786, 2018.
  6. Chris Chatfield. The analysis of time se- ries: an introduction. CRC press, 2016.
  7. Zhengping Che, Sanjay Purushotham, Kyunghyun Cho, David Sontag, and Yan Liu. Recurrent neural networks for multivariate time series with missing values. Scientific reports, 8(1):6085, 2018.
  8. Ian Goodfellow, Jean Pouget- Abadie, Mehdi Mirza, Bing Xu, David Warde-Farley, Sherjil Ozair, Aaron Courville, and Yoshua Bengio. Gen- erative adversarial nets. In Advances in neural information processing systems, pages 2672-2680, 2014.
  9. John W Graham. Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual review of psy- chology, 60:549-576, 2009.
  10. Granger and Newbold, 2014] Clive William John Granger and Paul Newbold. Forecasting economic time series. Academic Press, 2014.
  11. Hamzac ¸ebi, 2008] Cos ¸kun Hamzac ¸ebi. Improving artificial neural networks' performance in seasonal time series fore- casting. Information Sciences, 178(23):4550-4559, 2008.
  12. Andrew T Hudak, Nicholas L Crook- ston, Jeffrey S Evans, David E Hall, and Michael J Falkowski. Nearest neighbor imputation of species-level, plot-scale forest structure attributes from lidar data. Re- mote Sensing of Environment, 112(5):2232-2245, 2008.
  13. Alistair EW Johnson, Nic Dunkley, Louis Mayaud, Athanasios Tsanas, Andrew A Kramer, and Gari D Clifford. Patient specific predictions in the in- tensive care unit using a bayesian ensemble. In Computing in Cardiology (CinC), 2012, pages 249-252. IEEE, 2012.
  14. Alistair EW Johnson, Andrew A Kramer, and Gari D Clifford. Data preprocessing and mor- tality prediction: The physionet/cinc 2012 challenge re- visited. In Computing in Cardiology Conference (CinC), 2014, pages 157-160. IEEE, 2014.
  15. Kantardzic, 2011] Mehmed Kantardzic. Data mining: con- cepts, models, methods, and algorithms. John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
  16. Yonghong Luo, Xiangrui Cai, Ying Zhang, Jun Xu, et al. Multivariate time series imputa- tion with generative adversarial networks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pages 1601- 1612, 2018.
  17. Yisheng Lv, Yanjie Duan, Wenwen Kang, Zhengxi Li, Fei-Yue Wang, et al. Traffic flow prediction with big data: A deep learning approach. IEEE Trans. Intelligent Transportation Systems, 16(2):865-873, 2015.
  18. Archana Purwar and Sandeep Ku- mar Singh. Hybrid prediction model with missing value imputation for medical data. Expert Systems with Applica- tions, 42(13):5621-5631, 2015.
  19. Mohammad Sabokrou, Mohammad Khalooei, Mahmood Fathy, and Ehsan Adeli. Adversar- ially learned one-class classifier for novelty detection. In CVPR2019, pages 3379-3388, 2018.
  20. Pascal Vincent, Hugo Larochelle, Yoshua Bengio, and Pierre-Antoine Manzagol. Extract- ing and composing robust features with denoising autoen- coders. In Proceedings of the 25th international confer- ence on Machine learning, pages 1096-1103. ACM, 2008.
  21. Yoon et al., 2018] Jinsung Yoon, James Jordon, and Mi- haela Schaar. Gain: Missing data imputation using gen- erative adversarial nets. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 5675-5684, 2018.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Luo, Y., Zhang, Y., Cai, X., & Yuan, X.
Affiliations
Nankai University (CN)
Venue
Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Published
2019-08
Pages
3094-3100
OpenAlex
W2964425131
Cited by
257
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 71 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 9
FWCI
14.76
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (U1836109, 61772289)
  • Natural Science Foundation of Tianjin City (18ZXZNGX00110)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Time Series Analysis and Forecasting
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
multivariate time series imputation, missing data imputation, generative adversarial networks, discriminative loss, temporal information, time efficiency

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review