The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Breakdown Points of the Mean Combined With Some Rejection Rules
Abstract
In the past, methods for rejection of outliers have been investigated mostly without regard to the quantitative consequences for subsequent estimation or testing procedures. Moreover, although rejection of outliers with subsequent application of least squares methods is one of the oldest and most widespread classes of robust procedures, until recently no comparison was made with other robust methods. In this article the simplest situation, namely estimation of a location parameter in the potential presence of outliers, is treated by means of a Monte Carlo study. This study yields Monte Carlo variances of the “arithmetic mean” after rejection of outliers according to several classical and recent formal rules. The results are also compared with those for other robust estimators of location parameters. It turns out that a simple summary and theoretical explanation of the Monte Carlo results is provided by the breakdown points of the combined rejection-estimation procedures. As a by-product, the concept of breakdown point also leads to a better understanding of the so-called “masking effect” and can in fact replace the latter concept. Formulas for the breakdown points are given for the six types of rejection rules used. Some general aspects and properties of all methods for the rejection of outliers and their relation to other robust methods are also discussed. Finally, the treatment of outliers in the context of real data is considered, and several examples are briefly mentioned; one real-life example is analyzed in greater detail.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples)
SHAPIRO, S. S., & WILK, M. B. (1965) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/52.3-4.591 · Cited by 23,480
Robust estimation of a location parameter
Huber, P. J. (1964) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177703732 · Cited by 7,228
Huber, P. J. (1981) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471725250 · Cited by 7,066
Hawkins, D. M. (1980) · doi:10.1007/978-94-015-3994-4 · Cited by 2,982
Cited by
The identification of multiple outliers
Davies, L., & Gather, U. (1993) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1993.10476339 · Cited by 709
A physical SNOWPACK model for the Swiss avalanche warning
Lehning, M., Bartelt, P., Brown, B., & Fierz, C. (2002) · Cold Regions Science and Technology · doi:10.1016/s0165-232x(02)00072-1 · Cited by 586
Finelli, L. A., Baumann, H., Borbély, A. A., & Achermann, P. (2000) · Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/s0306-4522(00)00409-7 · Cited by 447
Metadata
- Authors
- Hampel, F. R.
- Venue
- Technometrics
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1985-05
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 95-107
- ISSN
- 0040-1706 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-2723
- OpenAlex
- W1982029035
- Cited by
- 187
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 2.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Breakdown Points of the Mean Combined With Some Rejection Rules. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00401706.1985.10488027
- The paper
- Hampel, F. R. (1985). The Breakdown Points of the Mean Combined With Some Rejection Rules. Technometrics. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1985.10488027
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.