On 01/13/2012 08:25 PM, collifu wrote:> Hi all,
>
> This is pretty basic but I am not an expert and I couldn't find
anything in
> the forum or my statistics book about it. I was reading a paper and the
> authors were using both "explained deviance" and "explained
variance" as
> synonyms. They were describing a GAM regression. Is that right? I performed
> an analysis in R to take a look to the output of GAM regression and I think
> that:
>
> - 'R-sq. (adj)' is the percentage of variance explained by the
regression,
> i.e., I can write "The regression explains xx% of variance".
> - 'Deviance explained' is a simple measure of the quality of the
fit but it
> is not related to the percentage of variance that is explained by the
> regression.
The deviance explained will be the same as the variance explained
(unadjusted) when you have Gaussian errors (deviance is then residual
sum of squares), but not otherwise. You can write "the regression
explains xx% of the deviance", of course.
best,
Simon> Am I right?
>
> Thank you so much
> Ram?n
>
> --
> View this message in context:
http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/deviance-and-variance-GAM-models-tp4293293p4293293.html
> Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-help at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> PLEASE do read the posting guide
http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.