search for: overparameterization

Dear all, I would like to fit a non-linear model of the form: y=g*x/(a+b*x) with nls(). However this model is somehow overparameterized and I get the error message about singular gradient matrix at initial parameter estimates. What I am interested in is to make inference about parameters b and g, so this has to be taken into account in the model formulation. What options do I have? Also, how is

//Referring to the response posted many years ago, copied below, what is the specific criterium used for singularity of the gradient matrix? Is a Singular Value Decomposition used to determine the singular values? Is it the gradient matrix condition number or some other criterion for determining singularity? // //Glenn // / / /> What does the error 'singular gradient' mean

Hi I have the problem with fitting curve to data with lm and glm. When I use polynominal dependiency, fitted values from model are OK, but I cannot recive proper values when I use coefficents to caltulate this. Let me present simple example: I have simple data.frame: (dd) a: 1 2 3 4 5 6 b: 3 5 6 7 9 10 I try to fit it to model: model=glm(b~poly(a,3),data=dd) I have following data

Dear R-users, A recent post (Feb 16) to R-help inquired about fitting a glmm with a negative binomial distribution. Professor Ripley responded that this was a difficult problem with the simpler Poisson model already being a difficult case: https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/2005-February/064708.html Since we are developing software for fitting general nonlinear random effects models we

Dear all, I'm building binomial mixed-model using lme4 package. I'm able to obtain outputs properly except when I include two particular variables: date (from 23 to 34; 1 being to first sampling day) and Latitude (UTM/100 000, from 55.42 to 56.53). No "NA" is any of those variables. In those cases, I get the warning message: "nlminb failed to converge" I tried to

I'm running a hierarchical linear model of legislative committee representativeness (so I have committees in chambers) using lme. It's a simple random-intercept-as-outcome model. When I run it, everything converges and I get results like this, trimmed for brevity. The following are the group(chamber)-level variables. The dependent variable is bounded between zero and one.

Hi everyone, ----------------------------- Coefficients: ar1 ar2 ma1 ma2 sar1 intercept drift 1.5283 -0.7189 -1.9971 0.9999 0.3982 0.0288 -9e-04 s.e. 0.0869 0.0835 0.0627 0.0627 0.1305 NaN NaN sigma^2 estimated as 0.04383: log likelihood = 4.34, aic = 7.32 Warning message: NaNs produced in: sqrt(diag(object$var.coef))

Greetings, I have a question that I'd like to get input on. I have a classic toxicology study where I artificially fertilized and exposed embryos to a chemical and counted defects. In addition, I kept track of male-female pairs that I used to artificially fertilize and generate embryos with. I need to use logistic regression to model the response, but also check that the genetics of the

consider p as random effect with 5 levels, what is difference between these two models? > p5.random.p <- lmer(Y ~p+(1|p),data=p5,family=binomial,control=list(usePQL=FALSE,msV=1)) > p5.random.p1 <- lmer(Y ~1+(1|p),data=p5,family=binomial,control=list(usePQL=FALSE,msV=1)) thanks, Aimin Yan

Hi, I have a dataset like this, > testdata Grouped Data: expr ~ visit | subject expr visit subject 1 6.502782 V1 A 2 6.354506 V1 B 3 6.349184 V1 C 4 6.386301 V2 A 5 6.376405 V2 B 6 6.758640 V2 C 7 6.414142 V3 A 8 6.354521 V3 B 9 6.396636 V3 C I tried the command >

Peter Dalgaard writes (in response to a question about 2-way ANOVA with imbalance): > ... There are various > boneheaded ways in which people try to use to assign some kind of > SumSq to main effects in the presence of interaction, and they are all > wrong - although maybe not very wrong if the unbalance is slight. People keep saying this

Hello R-Community, we are running aprogram to fit Non-linear differential equations to Aphid population Data and to estimate the birth and death parameters, here is the code: dat<-data.frame(Time=c(0:60),Cur=c(5,6.2,59,39,38,44,20.4,19.4,34.2,35.4,38.2,48.2,55.4,113.2, 97,112,115,126,136.6,140.6,147.2,151.6,157.8,170,202,210.4,221.2,224.4,248.2,266,

Hi, I am hoping some one can help with this. I am using nlme to fit a random coefficients model. It ran for hours before returning Error: Singularity in backsolve at level 0, block 1 The model is > plavix.nlme<-nlme(PLX_NRX~loglike(PLX_NRX,PD4_42D,GAT_34D,VIS_42D,MSL_42D,SPE_ROL,XM2_DUM,THX_DUM,b0,b1,b2,b3,b4,b5,b6,b7,alpha), + data=data, + fixed=list(b0 +

I saw a similar question but I still don't fully understand how to implement optim. Can someone help me out with this? Thanks. Keun-Hyung > vol<-rep(c(0.03, 0.5, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32), 3) > time<-rep(c(2,4,8),each=7) > p.mated<-c(0.47, 0.48, 0.43, 0.43, 0.26, 0.23, "null", 0.68, 0.62, 0.64, 0.58, 0.53, 0.47, + 0.24, 0.8, 0.79, 0.71, 0.56, 0.74, 0.8, 0.47) >

Hi, All: What tools exist for diagnosing singular gradient problems with 'nls'? Consider the following toy example: DF1 <- data.frame(y=1:9, one=rep(1,9)) nlsToyProblem <- nls(y~(a+2*b)*one, DF1, start=list(a=1, b=1), control=nls.control(warnOnly=TRUE)) Error in nlsModel(formula, mf, start, wts) : singular gradient matrix at initial

Dear R friends, I know that this topic has been mulled over before, and that there is a substantial difference between the convergence criteria for JMP and those for R. I apologize that this is somwehat raking cold coals. Summary: A model/data combination achieves convergence in JMP, and survives a reasonably rigorous examination (sensible parameter estimates, well-behaved surface,

Hello. I am working on an analysis involving the nonlinear mixed model function (nlme) in R. The data consist of measures of carbon fixation by leaves as a function of light intensity and the parametric function (standard in this area because it has a biological interpretation) is a non-rectangular hyperbola. I cannot get the nonlinear mixed model (nlme) function to converge cleanly. I am

Greetings. Here is sample code, with some comments. It shows how I can simulate data and estimate glm with binomial family when there is no individual level random error, but when I add random error into the linear predictor, I have a difficult time getting reasonable estimates of the model parameters or the variance component. There are no clusters here, just individual level responses, so

Good morning reader, I have encountered a, probably, simple issue with respect to the *formulae* of a *regression model* I want to use in my research. I’m researching alliances as part of my study Business Economics (focus Strategy) at the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam. In the research model I use a moderating variable, I’m looking for confirmation or help on the formulation of the model.

Hello Folks, Very new to R so bear with me, running 5.2 on XP. Trying to do a zero-inflated negative binomial regression on placental scar data as dependent. Lactation, location, number of tick larvae present and mass of mouse are independents. Dataframe and attributes below: Location Lac Scars Lar Mass Lacfac 1 Tullychurry 0 0 15 13.87 0 2 Somerset 0 0 0