Starting with the vector observation model <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">y = Hx + v</tex> , robust Bayesian estimates <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">x̂</tex> of the vector <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">x</tex> are constructed for the following two distinct situations: 1) the state <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">x</tex> is Gaussian and the observation error <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">v</tex> is (heavy-tailed) non-Gaussian and 2) the state is heavy-tailed non-Gaussian and the observation error is Gaussian. Bounds with respect to broad symmetric non-Gaussian families are derived for the error covariance matrix of these estimates. These "one-step" robust estimates are then used to obtain robust estimates for the Kalman filter setup <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">yₖ= Hₖxₖ+ vₖ, xₖ₊₁=Φₖxₖ+wₖ</tex> . Monte Carlo results demonstrate the robustness of the proposed estimation procedure, which might be termed a robustified Kalman filter.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Masreliez et al. (1977) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: