over, only the integral convolutions of GPDs with certain convolution kernels rather than GPD themselves enter the observable quantities. Thus, in order to extract the informa- tion on GPDs from the data, one of necessity has to rely upon different phenomenologicaly motivated parametrizations of GPDs and ingenious fitting procedures for the observable quantities. One of the most popular parametrizations of GPDs is the famous Radyushkin double distribution Ansatz (RDDA) [9] employed in numerous phenomenological applica- tions. In particular, the specific version of RDDA was adopted for gluon GPDs in the nucleon [10, 11]. There is the growing confidence that the present inability to describe some aspects of the available experimental data on the hard exclusive processes may be due to incomplete or inexact way of modelling GPDs (see e.g. discussions in [12–14]). A possible alternative way to parameterize GPDs consists in employing of the so-called dual parametrization of GPDs [15]. In this paper we apply the dual parametrization approach, which was originally developed for quark GPDs, to the case of gluon GPDs in the nucleon. We also perform the generalization of Abel transform tomography method [16] for the case of gluons. Finally, we discuss some aspects of the fitting strategy for the hard exclusive processes observables based on the dual parametrization of GPDs. Following the conventions accepted in [4], the unpolarized gluon GPDs in nucleon H $^{g}$, E g are defined as the Fourier transform of the matrix element of the nonlocal gluon operator between the nucleon states according to: The polarized gluon GPDs in nucleon ˜ H $^{g}$, ˜ E g are defined as In (2), (3) we employ the standard notations: n is the light-cone direction ( n 2 = 0, P · n ≡ P $^{+}$), P = 1 $_{2}$( p + p ′ ), Δ = p ′ − p , t = Δ $^{2}$, the skewness variable ξ refers to 3 II. BASIC DEFINITIONS 1 P · n ∫ dλ 2 π e iλxP · $^{n}$〈 N ( $^{$_{p}$′$_{)}$}$|F + $^{ν}$( − λn/ 2) F + ν ( λn/ 2) | N ( p ) 〉 = 1 2 P · n ¯ U ( P + Δ 2 ) [ H $^{g}$( x, ξ, t ) n$_{µ}$γ µ + 1 2 m$_{N}$ E $^{g}$( x, ξ, t ) iσ $^{µν}$n$_{µ}$ Δ$_{ν}$ ] U ( P − Δ 2 ) . (2) − i P · n ∫ dλ 2 π e iλxP · $^{n}$〈 N ( $^{$_{p}$′$_{)}$}$|F + $^{ν}$( − λn/ 2) ˜ F + ν ( λn/ 2) | N ( p ) 〉 = 1 2 P · n ¯ U ( P + Δ 2 ) [ ˜ H $^{g}$( x, ξ, t ) n$_{µ}$γ $^{µ}$γ 5 + 1 2 m$_{N}$ ˜ E $^{g}$( x, ξ, t ) γ$_{5}$n$_{µ}$ Δ µ ] U ( P − Δ 2 ) . (3)