<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The AstroStat Slog &#187; Lowess</title>
	<atom:link href="http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/tag/lowess/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog</link>
	<description>Weaving together Astronomy+Statistics+Computer Science+Engineering+Intrumentation, far beyond the growing borders</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2011 17:05:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>loess and lowess and locfit, oh my</title>
		<link>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2008/question-locfit-errors/</link>
		<comments>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2008/question-locfit-errors/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:12:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>chasc</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Algorithms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cross-Cultural]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fitting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jargon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Languages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncertainty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Diab Jerius]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[error]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[experimental error]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[local regression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[locfit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loess]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lowess]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[observational error]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ping Zhao]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[question for statisticians]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/?p=391</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Diab Jerius follows up on LOESS techniques with a very nice summary update and finds LOCFIT to be very useful, but there are still questions about how it deals with measurement errors and combining observations from different experiments:

A couple of weeks ago Vinay suggested using the LOESS algorithm to create smooth curves (separately) through the SSD [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Diab Jerius follows up on <a href="http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2008/question-lowess-error-bars">LOESS techniques</a> with a very nice summary update and finds LOCFIT to be very useful, but there are still questions about how it deals with measurement errors and combining observations from different experiments:</p>
<p><span id="more-391"></span></p>
<blockquote><p>A couple of weeks ago Vinay suggested using the LOESS algorithm to create smooth curves (separately) through the SSD and FPC points.  LOESS has been succeeded by LOWESS and, finally LOCFIT, which is the 800lb gorilla of local regression fitting.</p>
<p>The LOCFIT algorithm uses local regression (i.e. fits over samples of the data) to generate smooth curves.  There is an enormous body of literature on this, much of it summarized in the book</p>
<p><a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=D7GgBAfL4ngC">Local Regression and Likelikhood, by C. Loader</a><br />
ISBN 0-387-98775-4</p>
<p>which also serves as documentation for the LOCFIT software.  The techniques seem well established and accepted by the statistical community.</p>
<p>LOCFIT looks to be a very elegant approach, but, unfortunately, I have still not been able to glean any information as to how one introduces experimental errors into the regressions.  The voluminous research in this field certainly deals with experimental data, so I&#8217;m not quite sure what to make of this.</p>
<p>One way around this might be to take a Monte-Carlo approach: resample the data using the experimental errors, generate a new smoothing function, and generate a measure of the distribution of the fit functions.</p>
<p>For those interested, I have a copy of the above book on loan.<br />
It&#8217;s fascinating reading.</p>
<p>More about the actual code is available at this web site:<br />
<a href="http://locfit.herine.net/">http://locfit.herine.net/</a></p></blockquote>
<p>In addition, Ping Zhao asks: (paraphrasing) if you combine two separate sets of observations with vastly different numbers of data points in each, how do you weight them during a combined loess/lowess/locfit fit?</p>
<p>Comments and suggestions from statisticians are much appreciated!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2008/question-locfit-errors/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Q: Lowess error bars?</title>
		<link>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2008/question-lowess-error-bars/</link>
		<comments>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2008/question-lowess-error-bars/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 06:53:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>vlk</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Algorithms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fitting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Methods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncertainty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brad Wargelin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[error bands]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[error bars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[least-squares]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loess]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lowess]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polynomial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[question for statisticians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[smoothing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/?p=329</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How does one determine the error band around a Lowess curve?  How can we tell how robust any derived Lowess curve solution is?  Does anyone know?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is somewhat surprising that astronomers haven&#8217;t cottoned on to <a href="http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmd/section1/pmd144.htm">Lowess</a> curves yet.  That&#8217;s probably a good thing because I think people already indulge in smoothing far too much for their own good, and Lowess makes for a very powerful hammer.  But the fact that it is semi-parametric and is based on polynomial least-squares fitting does make it rather attractive.</p>
<p>And, of course, sometimes it is unavoidable, or so I told Brad W.  When one has too many points for a regular polynomial fit, and they are too scattered for a spline, and too few to try a wavelet &#8220;denoising&#8221;, and no real theoretical expectation of any particular model function, and all one wants is &#8220;a smooth curve, damnit&#8221;, then Lowess is just the ticket.</p>
<p>Well, almost.</p>
<p>There is one major problem &#8212; <em>how does one figure what the error bounds are on the &#8220;best-fit&#8221; Lowess curve?</em>  Clearly, each fit at each point can produce an estimate of the error, but simply collecting the separate errors is not the right thing to do because they would all be correlated.  I know how to propagate Gaussian errors in boxcar smoothing a histogram, but this is a whole new level of complexity.  Does anyone know if there is software that can calculate reliable error bands on the smooth curve?  We will take any kind of error model &#8212; Gaussian, Poisson, even the (local) variances in the data themselves.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2008/question-lowess-error-bars/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

