<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>     caa a22        4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">475826957</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">CHVBK</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20180406123831.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">cr unu---uuuuu</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">170329e20000601xx      s     000 0 eng  </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">10.1023/A:1004174024279</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1023/A:1004174024279</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Collins</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">John</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Calgary, T2N 1N4, Calgary, Alberta, Canada</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">Robustness Comparisons of Some Classes of Location Parameter Estimators</subfield>
   <subfield code="h">[Elektronische Daten]</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">[John Collins]</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Asymptotic biases and variances of M-, L- and R-estimators of a location parameter are compared under ε-contamination of the known error distribution F 0 by an unknown (and possibly asymmetric) distribution. For each ε-contamination neighborhood of F 0, the corresponding M-, L- and R-estimators which are asymptotically efficient at the least informative distribution are compared under asymmetric ε-contamination. Three scale-invariant versions of the M-estimator are studied: (i) one using the interquartile range as a preliminary estimator of scale: (ii) another using the median absolute deviation as a preliminary estimator of scale; and (iii) simultaneous M-estimation of location and scale by Huber's Proposal 2. A question considered for each case is: when are the maximal asymptotic biases and variances under asymmetric ε-contamination attained by unit point mass contamination at ∞? Numerical results for the case of the ε-contaminated normal distribution show that the L-estimators have generally better performance (for small to moderate values of ε) than all three of the scale-invariant M-estimators studied.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 2000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Robust estimation</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">M -</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">L - and R -estimators</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">asymptotic biases</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">asymptotic variances</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">asymmetric contamination</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="t">Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Kluwer Academic Publishers</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">52/2(2000-06-01), 351-366</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0020-3157</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">52:2&lt;351</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2000</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">52</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">10463</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004174024279</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="D">1</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">research-article</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">jats</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">856</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">40</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004174024279</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">100</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Collins</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">John</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Calgary, T2N 1N4, Calgary, Alberta, Canada</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">773</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">0-</subfield>
   <subfield code="t">Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Kluwer Academic Publishers</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">52/2(2000-06-01), 351-366</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0020-3157</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">52:2&lt;351</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2000</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">52</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">10463</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="900" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Metadata rights reserved</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">Springer special CC-BY-NC licence</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="898" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">BK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">XK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">XK010000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="949" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="F">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">NL-springer</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
