Talk:Robust regression
 | This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. (April 2009) |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Some of the sections of this article appear to be plagiarised e.g. the section "History and unpopularity of robust regression" has been copied and pasted from "Predictive Modeling and Analytics" By Jeffrey Strickland Vardasnejonas (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2015 (UTC) Oh, sorry looks like the copying was the other way around?! Vardasnejonas (talk) 15:58, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
The example section appears to discuss an example without actually presenting the example. Ideally there would be both a graph and the associated source code used to generate the graph.
The graphs used to be there. The page was vandalized - someone deleted the images. I've got bored of keep having to undo edits that lower the quality of articles, so I've given up. Tolstoy the Cat 16:56, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
I've almost got over being annoyed at the page being vandalized. I intend to add an example (a different one) back in. I'll do it over the next few days. Tolstoy the Cat 18:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
This entry needs a lot of work. I've made a few minor changes; will add more later if I have time. TPR —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.215.206.211 (talk) 07:56, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Proposed merge with Errors in variables model
editI don't think they should be merged. The only real connection I see is that the errors-in-variables model page uses the word "Robust" in one of its headings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tolstoy the Little Black Cat (talk • contribs) 12:47, March 14, 2007
- I agree - it certainly shouldn't be merged. Also, the original errors in variables page really needs to be greatly expanded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.251.0.7 (talk • contribs) 05:15, April 17, 2007
- I agree that a merge would be a very bad idea. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 14:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- I removed both tags, since the consensus is against it. --GargoyleMT 13:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Nuisance to criticize without capability to improve
editAs often the critics is bound to nothing but averaging. Is that the path to excellence? You could well replace the 'jargon' and the 'citation' tagsas well as the merger proposal with a 'stupidity' tag. Please contribute or stay out. Wireless friend (talk) 07:43, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Outlier detection
editStates that least squares "clearly" marks some interesting points as outliers, but I don't agree. Could this text be clarified? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nixphoeni (talk • contribs) 17:44, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Vague marker
editThe "Book by Rousseeuw Leroy" text where the "vague" marker has been placed could be Rousseeuw and Annick M. Leroy, "Robust Regression & Outlier Detection" (1987) as in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_set#Classic_data_sets 194.94.136.34 (talk) 12:48, 19 March 2024 (UTC)