# Detecting Atypical Values and Their Influence on Blast-Induced Seismic Measurement Results
## 5 Conclusions  
By scrutinizing all aforementioned results, the following conclusions can be drawn:  
1. Although the measurement data processed through regression statistics with a confidence interval of 0.6827 (Sigma 1) provides a better coefficient of determination and standard deviation, since it excludes about half or more measurement values, they do not completely nor correctly represent the full measurement dataset. In some cases, the data do not even provide enough measurement points for further analyses using the \"Blastware\" application. Therefore, it is recommended to use a confidence interval of 0.9575 (Sigma 2) for atypical value detection, since both the R\({}^{2}\) (CoD) and the standard deviation are highly acceptable. This is also a typical range used in metrology.
2. The calculation of the permitted charge weight per delay for the required distances from the blast with selected maximum PPV according to the type of the surrounding structures is a final product provided to blasting engineers. For a confidence interval of 0.9575 (Sigma 2), the calculations can, in some cases, offer more cost-efficient blasting by increasing the charge weight per delay, and, in others, stricter by decreasing the charge weight per delay, while always retaining the safety of the surrounding structures.  
The results show that, if a false measured value is included in the model or predictor development, it will provide erroneous results, which can lead to damage to the surrounding structures or an increase in the cost of blasting works. The detection and exclusion of atypical values (outliers) should be used in all projects where blasting works are performed in populated areas. By increasing the calculation accuracy, PPV control is improved. This would finally optimize blasting works by decreasing the costs and increasing safety. The next stage will be testing the proposed methodology on a large number of ongoing and future projects, such as blasting in quarries and open cuts for road/highway excavations and for excavation of underground parking in cities, to confirm the applicability of the results in all types of blasting works. The testing will be performed by installing a larger number of measurement instruments in the required number of measurement lines, depending on the number and direction of the protected structures surrounding blasting area. For each blast, the detection and exclusion of atypical values will be performed prior to calculations for the permitted charge weight per delay for the next blast.  
**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, S.S. and M.K.; Formal analysis, S.S. and M.K.; Investigation, S.S. and V.B.; Methodology, S.S. and D.K.; Resources, D.K. and V.B.; Software, S.S. and V.B.; Validation, M.K., D.K. and V.B.; Visualization, M.K., D.K. and V.B.; Writing--original draft, S.S. and M.K.; Writing--review and editing, S.S., M.K., D.K. and V.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
This research received no external funding.  
This work was supported by the Croatian Science Foundation (HRZZ) under the project IP-2019-04-1618.  
The authors declare no conflict of interest.