mad(y, center=median(y), constant=1.4826, na.rm=F, low=F) scale.tau(y, center=median(y), weights=<<see below>>, init.scale=<<see below>>, tuning=1.95, na.rm=F) scale.a(y, center=median(y), weights=<<see below>>, init.scale=<<see below>>, tuning=3.85, na.rm=F)
The MAD scale estimate has a 50% breakdown point and generally has very small bias compared with other scale estimators when there is "contamination" in the data. Tau-estimates and A-estimates also have 50% breakdown, but are more efficient for Gaussian data. The A-estimate that scale.a computes is redescending, so it is inappropriate if it necessary that the scale estimate always be increasing as the size of a datapoint is increased. However, the A-estimate is very good if all of the contamination is far from the "good" data.
Burns and Martin (1992) compares tau-estimates and A-estimates. A-estimates are also discussed in Hoaglin, Mosteller and Tukey (1983). Code for another class of scale estimate can be found in Croux and Rousseeuw (1992).
Croux, C. and Rousseeuw, P. J. (1992). Time-efficient algorithms for two highly robust estimators of scale. to appear in COMPSTAT 1992.
Hampel, F. R., Ronchetti, E. M., Rousseeuw, P. J. and Stahel, W. A. (1986). Robust Statistics: The Approach Based on Influence Functions. Wiley, New York.
Hoaglin, D. C., Mosteller, F. and Tukey, J. W., editors (1983). Understanding Robust and Exploratory Data Analysis. Wiley, New York.
mad(corn.yield, constant=1)mad(rnorm(200)) # approximately 1.