Assessing the Effectiveness of Statistical and Temporal Imputation Methods for Bi-LSTM-Based Forecasting on Environmental and Climate Time Series Data

Authors

  • ID Adelia Desyana Eka Putri Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia
  • ID Aji Prasetya Wibawa Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia
  • ID Adelia Khansa Ristiaputri Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia
  • ID Adhelia Wida Khaidir Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia
  • ID Dhia Rafifah Thifal Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia
  • ID Agung Bella Putra Utama Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30812/matrik.v25i3.6026

Keywords:

Bi-LSTM, Imputation, Missing value, Particle Swarm Optimization, Time series forecasting

Abstract

Time series data in climatology and environmental research are highly susceptible to missing values that can disrupt temporal structures and degrade forecasting performance. This study evaluates the effectiveness of several imputation methods in improving the predictive performance of a Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory model across three missing-data mechanisms: Missing Completely at Random, Missing at Random, and Missing Not at Random. The compared methods include mean, median, mode, k-nearest neighbors, multiple imputation by chained equations, and last observation carried forward, with data deletion serving as the baseline. All datasets were normalized using the min–max technique, and model hyperparameters were optimized through Particle Swarm Optimization. Performance was assessed using mean absolute percentage error, root mean square error, and the coefficient of determination. The findings indicate that proper imputation significantly enhances forecasting accuracy compared to deleting incomplete observations. In Dataset 1, the last observation carried forward achieved the best performance with a coefficient of determination of 0.923 and a root mean square error of 3.373. Similarly, Dataset 2 showed optimal results with the same method, producing a coefficient of determination of 0.950 and a root mean square error of 14.458. The most substantial improvement was observed in Dataset 3, where mean imputation reduced the mean absolute percentage error from 3.219 to 0.329 while increasing the coefficient of determination to 0.986. These results highlight the critical role of selecting an imputation strategy in deep learning-based time series forecasting and provide practical guidance for handling incomplete environmental datasets.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

  • Adelia Desyana Eka Putri, Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia

    .

  • Aji Prasetya Wibawa, Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia

    .

  • Adelia Khansa Ristiaputri, Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia

    .

  • Adhelia Wida Khaidir, Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia

    .

  • Dhia Rafifah Thifal, Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia

    .

  • Agung Bella Putra Utama, Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia

    .

References

[1] C. Betancourt, C. W. Li, F. Kleinert, and M. G. Schultz, “Graph Machine Learning for Improved Imputation of Missing

Tropospheric Ozone Data,” Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 57, no. 46, pp. 18 246–18 258, 2023, https:

//doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.3c05104.

[2] C. Xie, C. Huang, D. Zhang, and W. He, “Bilstm-i: A deep learning-based long interval gap-filling method for meteorological

observation data,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 18, no. 19, pp. 1–12, 2021, https:

//doi.org/10.3390/ijerph181910321.

[3] V. Hua, T. Nguyen, M.-S. Dao, H. D. Nguyen, and B. T. Nguyen, “The impact of data imputation on air quality prediction

problem,” PLOS ONE, vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 1–39, 09 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306303

[4] T. Kim, J. Kim, W. Yang, H. Lee, and J. Choo, “Missing value imputation of time-series air-quality data via deep neural

networks,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 18, no. 22, pp. 1–8, 2021, https://doi.org/

10.3390/ijerph182212213.

[5] C. Wongoutong, “Performance Comparison of Various Imputation Methods for Missing Data Mechanisms ( MAR , MCAR ,

and MNAR ) in a Nonstationary Time Series,” International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences, vol. 25, no. 1,

pp. 1–16, October, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1155/ijmm/3031708.

[6] W. Alahamade, I. Lake, C. E. Reeves, and B. De La Iglesia, “Evaluation of multivariate time series clustering for imputation

of air pollution data,” Geoscientific Instrumentation, Methods and Data Systems, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 265–285, 2021, https:

//doi.org/10.5194/gi-10-265-2021.

[7] A. T. Prihatno, H. Nurcahyanto, F. Ahmed, and H. Rahman, “Forecasting PM2 . 5 Concentration Using a Single-Dense Layer

BiLSTM Method,” Electronics, vol. 10, no. 15, p. 1808, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10151808.

[8] A. S. Firmansyah and A. T. Putra, “Implementation of Bidirectional Long-Short Term Memory ( Bi- LSTM ) and Attention

to Detect Political Fake News Using IndoBERT and GloVe Embedding,” Recursive Journal of Informatics, vol. 3, no. 2, pp.

68–76, 2025, https://doi.org/10.15294/rji.v3i2.159.

[9] J. F. Ruma, M. S. G. Adnan, A. Dewan, and R. M. Rahman, “Particle swarm optimization based LSTM networks for water

level forecasting: A case study on Bangladesh river network,” Results in Engineering, vol. 17, no. July 2022, p. 100951, 2023,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2023.100951.

[10] K. J. Lee, J. B. Carlin, J. A. Simpson, and M. Moreno-betancur, “Assumptions and analysis planning in studies with missing

data in multiple variables: moving beyond the MCAR/MAR/MNAR classification,” International Journal of Epidemiology,

vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 1268–1275, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyad008.

[11] A. A. R. Khattab, N. M. Elshennawy, and M. Fahmy, “GMA: Gap Imputing Algorithm for time series missing values,” Journal

of Electrical Systems and Information Technology, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–20, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1186/s43067-023-00094-1.

[12] J. Wang, Z. Yan, T. Pan, Z. Zhu, X. Song, and D. Yang, “applied sciences Drilling Parameters Multi-Objective Optimization

Method Based on PSO-Bi-LSTM,” Applied Sciences, vol. 13, no. 21, p. 11666, 2023, https://doi.org/10.3390/app132111666.

[13] A. Mechanisms, “BiLSTM-MLAM : A Multi-Scale Time Series Prediction Model for Sensor Data Based on Bi-LSTM and

Local Attention Mechanisms,” Sensors, vol. 24, no. 12, p. 3962, 2024, https://doi.org/10.3390/s24123962.

[14] M. A. Helaly, S. Rady, M. Mabrouk, M. M. Aref, and S. Villarroya, “Advancements in water quality prediction : a practical

review of machine learning and deep learning approaches,” Cluster Computing, vol. 28, no. 9, pp. 1–17, 2025, https://doi.org/

10.1007/s10586-025-05221-3.

[15] N. Ahmad and V. Kumar, “Enhancing PM 2 . 5 Air Pollution Forecasting with Novel Random Imputation Based on Hybrid

RNN - Bidirectional GRU ( nRI RNN - BiGRU ) Model,” SN Computer Science, vol. 6, no. 2, p. 637, 2025, https://doi.org/10.

1007/s42979-025-04167-y.

[16] V. V. Guggilam and G. Sundaram, “Spatio-Temporal Bi-LSTM Based Variational Auto-Encoder for Multivariate IoT Data

Imputation,” International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 352–367, 2024, https://doi.org/10.

22266/ijies2024.0630.28.

[17] S. Surono, K.W. Goh, C.W. Onn, A. Nurraihan, N. S. Siregar, A. B. Saeid, and T. T.Wijaya, “Optimization of MarkovWeighted

Fuzzy Time Series Forecasting Using Genetic Algorithm ( GA ) and Particle Swarm Optimization ( PSO ),” Emerging Science

Journal, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 1375–1393, 2022, https://doi.org/10.28991/ESJ-2022-06-06-010.

[18] J. H. Alkhateeb, “Fine Tuning Hyperparameters of Deep Learning Models Using Metaheuristic Accelerated Particle Swarm

Optimization Algorithm,” IEEE Access, vol. 13, no. July, pp. 134 506–134 518, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2025.

3591403.

[19] D. Chicco, M. J. Warrens, and G. Jurman, “The coefficient of determination R-squared is more informative than SMAPE ,

MAE , MAPE , MSE and RMSE in regression analysis evaluation,” PeerJ Computer Science, vol. 7, no. e623, pp. 1–24, 2021,

https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.623.

[20] M. Chen, H. Zhu, Y. Chen, and Y. Wang, “A Novel Missing Data Imputation Approach for Time Series Air Quality Data Based

on Logistic Regression,” Atmosphere, vol. 13, no. 7, p. 1044, jun 2022, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos13071044.

[21] A. Galdelli, G. Narang, S. Tomassini, L. D. Agostino, A. N. Tassetti, and A. Mancini, “Data imputation in large and small

- scale spatiotemporal time series gaps using BackForward Bi - LSTM,” Journal of Big Data, vol. 12, p. 115, May, 2025,

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40537-025-01163-0.

[22] J. G. Kim, S. Y. Lee, and I. B. Lee, “The Development of an LSTM Model to Predict Time Series Missing Data of Air

Temperature inside Fattening Pig Houses,” Agriculture (Switzerland), vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 1–18, 2023, https://doi.org/10.3390/

agriculture13040795.

[23] H. Karnati, A. Soma, and A. Alam, “Comprehensive analysis of various imputation and forecasting models for predicting PM2

. 5 pollutant in Delhi,” Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 37, no. 17, pp. 11 441–11 458, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1007/

s00521-025-11047-2.

[24] K. Tzoumpas, “A Data Filling Methodology for Time Series Based on CNN and ( Bi ) LSTM Neural Networks,” IEEE Access,

vol. 12, pp. 31 443–31 460, February, 2024, https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3369891.

[25] G. B. Y. A. Kara, E. Pekel, E. Ozcetin, “Genetic algorithm optimized a deep learning method with attention mechanism for

soil moisture prediction,” Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 7, no. 36, pp. 1761–1772, 2024, https://doi.org/10.1007/

s00521-023-09168-7.

Downloads

Published

2026-07-31

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

[1]
A. D. Eka Putri, A. P. Wibawa, A. K. . Ristiaputri, A. W. Khaidir, D. R. Thifal, and A. B. Putra Utama, “Assessing the Effectiveness of Statistical and Temporal Imputation Methods for Bi-LSTM-Based Forecasting on Environmental and Climate Time Series Data”, MATRIK, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 523–538, Jul. 2026, doi: 10.30812/matrik.v25i3.6026.