271:
where 1) the state noise is
Gaussian or its variance small in comparison to the observation noise variance or 2) the observation noise is Gaussian and the system is one step observable. In both cases the state estimate is formed as a linear prediction corrected by a nonlinear function of past and present observations. Some simulation results are presented." (4 pages, IEEE automatic control, 1975)
491:. I don't know what the allegation of COI is based on, but in any case COI is not by itself a ground for deletion. The citations produced by Google scholar and Google books show sufficient notability. The treatment leaves ample room for improvement, but that's what Knowledge (XXG) is for; it's not so bad that it cannot be improved and needs to be deleted. --
654:
but the article clearly needs a very large amount of work. Even after a lot of work we could still argue about
Knowledge (XXG) notability, but I hope that we could find a home on some wiki for a clear statement of this algorithm if (and only if) it allows someone with a basic knowledge of Kalman filtering and robust statistics to understand it.
558:. A problem is that no general consensus has emerged as to how much a theorem has to be cited to become notable. The GS cites for Masreliez's paper appear to be 190, which is not at all high compared to some of the figures that appear on these pages. It may not be useful to have an article on every paper with 190 cites or more.
270:
Did you not click on the link to the author's summary at
Zentralblatt? "Two approaches to the non-Gaussian filtering problem are presented. The proposed filters retain the computationally attractive recursve structure of the Kalman filter and they approximate well the minimal variance filter in cases
653:
or possibly userfy if someone is willing to work on it. We can't allow an article on a theorem which doesn't state the theorem. It isn't even clear from the current article that the object is really a theorem or an algorithm. I have enough background to understand what the algorithm might be doing
622:
Notability yes, but it is established not so much by the name of theorem, but rather by the name of its paper, which on Google
Scholar gives 161 hits (and the 190 citations). This means that most scientists are not aware of a title of the theorem (1975), but well on its scientific implication. I
369:
a minor mathematical theorem, that (like much such work) builds upon earlier work & has been built upon by later work. No indication that this theorem has received "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", just occasional discussion in derivative primary
149:
233:
under "anywhere" with the keyword "Masreliez". There were nine results, including four papers by the author. The paper containing the theorem has not been reviewed on
Mathscinet, but is cited in 3 subsequent notes. In
503:. Seriously, did the people !voting delete even attempt to search for the subject. Apparently some people find this notable enough to mention in an abstract for published lecture notes.
241:
There are four citations which reproduce the three citations in
Mathscinet, plus a second citation by the author Cipra (with Rubio) from a paper which was not reviewed on Mathscinet.
143:
110:
346:
Why should I not list it on the
Swedish, Japanese and Spannish wikis, as I use to edit there since years, if I find it a notable idea?? Is it really neccessary to list all 144
425:
83:
78:
87:
48:. Notability isn'tclearly established but there seems to be some consensus that a new more focused article might be more acceptable then the current one
70:
238:, I found 15 results for the name with a similar search. The author's summary of the 1975 paper is reproduced in a scanned version of Zentralblatt.
215:
How does one know whether it's a notable result or not, without knowing its content? The article fails to say what
Masreliez’s theorem says.
201:
Unnotable result by unnotable person. Given details on user page and editing history across multiple other wikipedias, probably self-written.
164:
131:
17:
639:
125:
663:
643:
617:
567:
550:
531:
515:
495:
481:
464:
190 citings as you mention below should be "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
458:
440:
413:
383:
359:
321:
280:
265:
250:
224:
210:
192:
52:
183:
article by
Masreliez promoting his estimation of Kalman filtering. Not generally a notable algorithm and not encyclopedic.
74:
239:
121:
678:
36:
377:
623:
found this notable enough for my edits on the
Japanese version and would vote for “Keep” here as well. (+4 st ~)
188:
171:
677:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
597:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
584:
this theorem. There are 11 Google Scholar hits for this linked above, as opposed to at least a thousand for "
184:
66:
58:
261:
220:
627:
137:
613:
511:
301:
477:
409:
355:
317:
596:". At the same time, I'm not convinced by the argument about it building on other work. After all,
563:
454:
659:
605:
593:
157:
635:
546:
473:
405:
351:
313:
257:
216:
589:
527:
492:
469:
436:
389:
276:
246:
206:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
609:
601:
585:
507:
397:
608:, and yet we quite rightly have articles on all three. Notability is the criterion here.
309:
180:
559:
450:
401:
655:
631:
542:
404:, which I reckon a reliable source, at least to give a sense of not being minor... /
523:
522:
Martin, the person who mentioned it in 1979, was a coauthor of another short note.
432:
272:
242:
235:
202:
49:
104:
468:
status should also add to notability as should the impact on follow up papers on
373:
305:
230:
334:
330:
297:
347:
541:. Clearly notable enough for Knowledge (XXG). Just needs a lot of work.
504:
338:
465:
296:. I am afraid this is just foul tactics in jps’ initiated battue at
350:
to the follow up article by Masreliez & Doug Martin (1977)? /
671:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
300:
associated edits. Jps takes fright at any edit that might give
329:. Remarkable unsupported allegations and conclusions. I am NOT
506:
Which is just one of the more than 200 hits on google scholar.
472:
and its applicability over the notable Kalman filter range. /
370:
literature, and the odd passing mention in the secondary.
576:
as not notable. There needs to be evidence of articles
100:
96:
92:
156:
304:
credit as a notable person also doing well received
170:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
681:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
426:list of Science-related deletion discussions
308:science. Please also note personal attacks
420:
424:: This debate has been included in the
388:Maybe, but at stake here is its role in
256:So what does the theorem actually say?
449:for reasons above. May be too early.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
398:50 third party relevant references
24:
333:or his puppet. I am living in
1:
664:18:26, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
644:21:24, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
618:09:46, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
568:06:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
551:16:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
532:23:00, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
516:09:39, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
496:23:28, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
482:00:44, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
459:22:10, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
441:18:05, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
414:20:57, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
384:14:35, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
360:14:17, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
322:00:44, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
281:08:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
266:00:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
251:18:43, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
225:02:21, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
211:10:18, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
193:03:30, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
53:03:46, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
698:
674:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
598:Fermat's Little Theorem
392:. I use to support the
604:is a special case of
600:is a special case of
253:cses where either 1)
67:Masreliez’s theorem
59:Masreliez’s theorem
606:Lagrange's Theorem
594:Lagrange's Theorem
396:of followers with
302:C. Johan Masreliez
229:I did a search on
44:The result was
647:
630:comment added by
580:rather than just
470:robust estimation
443:
429:
390:robust statistics
689:
676:
646:
624:
590:Rouche's Theorem
430:
382:
175:
174:
160:
108:
90:
34:
697:
696:
692:
691:
690:
688:
687:
686:
685:
679:deletion review
672:
625:
602:Euler's Theorem
586:Rolle's Theorem
402:Academic Search
380:
371:
337:, Masreliez in
117:
81:
65:
62:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
695:
693:
684:
683:
667:
666:
648:
620:
571:
553:
535:
534:
519:
518:
498:
486:
485:
484:
444:
418:
417:
416:
376:
363:
362:
343:
342:
324:
291:
290:
289:
288:
287:
286:
285:
284:
283:
178:
177:
114:
61:
56:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
694:
682:
680:
675:
669:
668:
665:
661:
657:
652:
649:
645:
641:
637:
633:
629:
621:
619:
615:
611:
607:
603:
599:
595:
591:
587:
583:
579:
575:
572:
569:
565:
561:
557:
554:
552:
548:
544:
540:
537:
536:
533:
529:
525:
521:
520:
517:
513:
509:
505:
502:
499:
497:
494:
490:
487:
483:
479:
475:
471:
467:
463:
462:
460:
456:
452:
448:
445:
442:
438:
434:
427:
423:
419:
415:
411:
407:
403:
399:
395:
391:
387:
386:
385:
381:
379:
375:
368:
365:
364:
361:
357:
353:
349:
345:
344:
340:
336:
332:
328:
325:
323:
319:
315:
311:
307:
303:
299:
295:
292:
282:
278:
274:
269:
268:
267:
263:
259:
258:Michael Hardy
255:
254:
252:
248:
244:
240:
237:
232:
228:
227:
226:
222:
218:
217:Michael Hardy
214:
213:
212:
208:
204:
200:
197:
196:
195:
194:
190:
186:
182:
173:
169:
166:
163:
159:
155:
151:
148:
145:
142:
139:
136:
133:
130:
127:
123:
120:
119:Find sources:
115:
112:
106:
102:
98:
94:
89:
85:
80:
76:
72:
68:
64:
63:
60:
57:
55:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
673:
670:
650:
626:— Preceding
581:
577:
573:
555:
538:
500:
488:
446:
421:
393:
372:
366:
326:
293:
236:Zentralblatt
198:
179:
167:
161:
153:
146:
140:
134:
128:
118:
45:
43:
31:
28:
610:Zarboublian
508:TimothyRias
144:free images
582:mentioning
560:Xxanthippe
451:Xxanthippe
306:mainstream
231:Mathscinet
656:Dingo1729
433:• Gene93k
348:citations
335:Stockholm
331:Masreliez
298:Masreliez
640:contribs
632:Mariguld
628:unsigned
543:Melcombe
111:View log
556:Comment
524:Mathsci
493:Lambiam
367:Delete:
339:Seattle
294:Comment
273:Mathsci
243:Mathsci
203:Mathsci
150:WP refs
138:scholar
84:protect
79:history
50:Spartaz
651:Delete
574:Delete
474:Kurtan
466:Eponym
447:Delete
406:Kurtan
394:number
352:Kurtan
341:, USA!
314:Kurtan
199:Delete
181:WP:COI
122:Google
88:delete
46:delete
578:about
400:from
378:Stalk
374:Hrafn
312:. ¨(
165:JSTOR
126:books
105:views
97:watch
93:links
16:<
660:talk
636:talk
614:talk
592:", "
588:", "
564:talk
547:talk
539:Keep
528:talk
512:talk
501:Keep
489:Keep
478:talk
455:talk
437:talk
422:Note
410:talk
356:talk
327:Keep
318:talk
310:here
277:talk
262:talk
247:talk
221:talk
207:talk
189:talk
158:FENS
132:news
101:logs
75:talk
71:edit
431:--
185:jps
172:TWL
109:– (
662:)
642:)
638:•
616:)
566:)
549:)
530:)
514:)
480:)
461:.
457:)
439:)
428:.
412:)
358:)
320:)
279:)
264:)
249:)
223:)
209:)
191:)
152:)
103:|
99:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
77:|
73:|
658:(
634:(
612:(
570:.
562:(
545:(
526:(
510:(
476:(
453:(
435:(
408:(
354:(
316:(
275:(
260:(
245:(
219:(
205:(
187:(
176:)
168:·
162:·
154:·
147:·
141:·
135:·
129:·
124:(
116:(
113:)
107:)
69:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.