Abstract
The debate on which smoothing method is ”best”, discussed for example in Chu and Marron (1991), Breiman and Peters (1992), or Sheather (1992), had to be extended to other estimators, due to renewed interest for local polynomial fitting starting in the early 1990’s. Let us congratulate Marron, Cleveland and Loader, Seifert and Gasser for providing pertinent arguments on this question and valuable contributions to the study of this problem.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Breiman L. and Peters S.(1992) Comparing automatic smoothers (A public service enterprise), International Satistical Review, 60, 3, pp. 271–290.
Chu C.K. and Marron J.S. (1991) Choosing a kernel regression estimator, Statistical Science, 6, 4, pp. 404–436.
Delecroix M. and Thomas-Agnan C. (1995) Kernel and spline smoothing under shape restrictions. Submitted.
Hastie T.J. and Tibshirani J.R. (1990) Generalized additive models, Chapmann and Hall
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1996 Physica-Verlag Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Thomas-Agnan, C. (1996). Comments. In: Härdle, W., Schimek, M.G. (eds) Statistical Theory and Computational Aspects of Smoothing. Contributions to Statistics. Physica-Verlag HD. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48425-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48425-4_6
Publisher Name: Physica-Verlag HD
Print ISBN: 978-3-7908-0930-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-48425-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive