Articles | Volume 10, issue 1
Geosci. Instrum. Method. Data Syst., 10, 123–140, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-10-123-2021
Geosci. Instrum. Method. Data Syst., 10, 123–140, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-10-123-2021

Research article 28 Jun 2021

Research article | 28 Jun 2021

A comparison of gap-filling algorithms for eddy covariance fluxes and their drivers

Atbin Mahabbati et al.

Viewed

Total article views: 1,683 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
1,445 228 10 1,683 24 11 18
  • HTML: 1,445
  • PDF: 228
  • XML: 10
  • Total: 1,683
  • Supplement: 24
  • BibTeX: 11
  • EndNote: 18
Views and downloads (calculated since 07 Sep 2020)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 07 Sep 2020)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 1,332 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 1,327 with geography defined and 5 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 

Cited

Latest update: 27 Oct 2021
Download
Short summary
We reviewed eight algorithms to estimate missing values of environmental drivers and three major fluxes in eddy covariance time series. Overall, machine-learning algorithms showed superiority over the rest. Among the top three models (feed-forward neural networks, eXtreme Gradient Boost, and random forest algorithms), the latter showed the most solid performance in different scenarios.