SOURCE: IS:8900-1978 Method 1 For Single Outlier, Assume A Set of Following Observations

SOURCE: IS:8900-1978
Example. Method 1 For Single Outlier, Assume a set of following observations:

1 By mean and standard deviation
Values x-¯x (x-¯x)2
44 4.4 19.36
42 2.4 5.76
41.5 1.9 3.61
44.5 4.9 24.01
41 1.4 1.96
46.5 6.9 47.61
39 -0.6 0.36
32 -7.6 57.76
38 -1.6 2.56
27.5 -12.1 146.41
mean 39.6
34.37778
sd= 5.86
xn is the largest doughtful observation
T1= 1.177
2.176
Now, check the Table No. 1 for Tn on the basis of level of significance, whether it is greater than calculated
value or not. If calculated Tn is GREATER than Tabulated Value, then it would be considered as outlier and
rejected, otherwise vice versa.
The calculated Tn i.e. T1 is LESS then the Tn given in table on 5% or 1% level of significance, hence the largest
value, 40 willnot be considered as an outlier and will not be rejected.
2 By ratio of differences between relevant order of observations
Values
65.5 Arrange the observations in Ascending order

65.5
66.5
66.5
67
68.5
68.5
70.5
71
72
First, decide whether the outlier to be considered is smallest or largest value
Then, look out the no. of observations
Now, from Table No. 2 select the formula on the basis of smallest or largest value
For the above set of observations, we have to find out the outlier for largest value
From Table No. 2, we are choosing the ratio r11
The formula is
r11= 0.154
The calculated r11 is LESS then the rn given in table on 5% OR 1% level of significance, hence the larg
value, 92.50 will NOT be considered as an outlier and WILL NOT BE rejected.
er than calculated
red as outlier and
ce, hence the largest

ignificance, hence the largest
d.
Example. Method 2 For Two or more Outliers (AT EITHER END), Assume a set of
following observations:
1 One method which can be used is, the previous method can also be taken
repeatedly for detecting the outlier.
2 By mean and standard deviation
N Values x-¯x (x-¯x)2 N Values x-¯x (x-¯x)2

1 89 -1.8 3.24 1 89 -1.800 3.240
2 90 -0.8 0.64 2 90 -0.800 0.640
3 90.5 -0.3 0.09 3 90.5 -0.300 0.090
4 90.5 -0.3 0.09 4 90.5 -0.300 0.090
5 90.5 -0.3 0.09 5 90.5 -0.300 0.090
6 91 0.2 0.04 6 91 0.200 0.040
7 91 0.2 0.04 7 91 0.200 0.040
8 91.5 0.7 0.49
9 91.5 0.7 0.49
10 92.5 1.7 2.89
MEAN= 90.8
8.100
90.500
where k is no. of suspect observations i.e. 2

here "n-k" will be"(13-2=11)"
4.230
0.522
For this method we have compare the value of Lk from Tabulated Value of Lk given
in Table No.3 , If is LESSER than the Tabulated Value then only it will be considered as
an outlier, otherwise not.
In above example the value of Lk= 0.522 is GREATER than the tabulated one, and
hence there is not enough evidence to suspect two largest observations as outlier.
CLAUSE NO. 5.1
Example
Method 3 For Two or more Outliers (atleast one
outlier at each end), Assume a set of following
observations:
1 Test for two outlier, one outlier at each of two ends 2 Test for more than two
N Values x-¯x (x-¯x)2 N Values
1 30.5 -5.250 27.563 1 9.5

2 31 -4.750 22.563 2 19.5
3 32.5 -3.250 10.563 3 30
4 34 -1.750 3.063 4 31
5 34 -1.750 3.063 5 32
6 34 -1.750 3.063 6 38
7 35.5 -0.250 0.063 7 40
8 37 1.250 1.563 8 42.5
9 39 3.250 10.563 9 43.5
10 50 14.250 203.063 10 45
mean 35.75 mean 33.100

31.681
sd= 5.63
= 19.5
= 3.464
from table, R/s 3.68
Now compare the ratio R/s from the value given in Table 4 on the
basis of level of significance, If this value is GREATER then the
value given in the table, then both values will be considered as an
outlier
In above example, Ratio R/s is GREATER than the value given in

table-4, hence both the values (largest and smallest) would be
considered as an outlier.
36.5 37.0 37.5 38.0 39.0
37
37.5
38
39
39.5
39.5
39.5
41.5
50
30.5 31.0 32.5 34.0 34.0

31
32.5
34
34
34
35.5
37
39
50
Test for more than two outlier, atleast one outlier at each end
Ascending order
x-¯x Z-¯Z (Z-¯Z)2 Z-¯Z (Z-¯Z)2
(x-¯x) EXCLUDING SUSPECT
23.600 z1 -0.7 1.04 1.08 z1 -0.7 0.70 0.49
13.600 z2 -0.7 1.04 1.08 z2 -0.7 0.70 0.49
3.100 z3 -0.2 0.54 0.29 z3 -0.2 0.20 0.04
2.100 z4 -0.2 0.54 0.29 z4 -0.2 0.20 0.04
1.100 z5 0.3 0.04 0.00 z5 0.3 -0.30 0.09
-4.900 z6 0.3 0.04 0.00 z6
-6.900 z7 0.3 0.04 0.00 z7
-9.400 z8 0.8 -0.46 0.21
-10.400 z9 1.7 -1.36 1.85
11.900 z10 1.8 1.46 2.13
2
-0.3 U 5= 1.15
2
0.34 U 10= 6.94
E3= 0.166
TABLE VALUE= 0.037 5%
0.013 1%
Now compare the ratio EK from the value given in Table 5 on
the basis of level of significance, If this value is LESSER then the
value given in the table, then all suspect values will be
considered as an outlier
In above example, E3 is LESSER than the value given in table-5,

hence all the suspect values would be considered as an outlier.
39.5 39.5 39.5 41.5 50.0
34.0 35.5 37.0 39.0 50.0

SOURCE: IS:8900-1978 Method 1 For Single Outlier, Assume A Set of Following Observations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SOURCE: IS:8900-1978 Method 1 For Single Outlier, Assume A Set of Following Observations

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SOURCE: IS:8900-1978 Method 1 For Single Outlier, Assume A Set of Following Observations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SOURCE: IS:8900-1978

Example. Method 1 For Single Outlier, Assume a set of following observations:

xn is the largest doughtful observation

65.5 Arrange the observations in Ascending order

ce, hence the largest

N Values x-¯x (x-¯x)2 N Values x-¯x (x-¯x)2

where k is no. of suspect observations i.e. 2

1 30.5 -5.250 27.563 1 9.5

mean 35.75 mean 33.100

In above example, Ratio R/s is GREATER than the value given in

30.5 31.0 32.5 34.0 34.0

In above example, E3 is LESSER than the value given in table-5,

34.0 35.5 37.0 39.0 50.0

You might also like