similar to: Predicting complicated GAMMs on response scale

Greetings! I am looking for advice regarding the best way to compare GAMMs. I know other model outputs return enough information for R's AIC, ANOVA, etc. commands to function, but this is not the case with GAMM unless one specifies the gam or lme portion. I know these parts of the gamm contain items that will facilitate comparisons between gamms. Is it correct to simply use these values

Dear R users I have a question related to the interpretation of results based on GAMMs using Simon Woods package gamm4. I have repeated measurements (hours24) of subjects (vpnr) and one factor with three levels (pred). The outcome (dv) is binary. In the first model I'd like to test for differences among factor levels (main effects only): gamm.11<-gamm4(dv ~ pred +s(hours24), random = ~

Greetings This is a long email. I'm struggling with a data set comprising 2,278 hydroacoustic estimates of fish biomass density made along line transects in two lakes (lakes Michigan and Huron, three years in each lake). The data represent lakewide surveys in each year and each data point represents the estimate for a horizontal interval 1 km in length. I'm interested in comparing

Dear all, I?m analyzing this dataset containing biodiversity indices, measured over time (Week), and at various contaminant concentrations (Treatment). We have two replicates (Replicate) per treatment. I?m looking for the effects of time (Week) and contaminant concentration (Treatment) on diversity indices (e.g. richness). Initial analysis with GAM models showed temporal autocorrelation of

Hello, I am having some difficulty converting my gam code to a correct gamm code, and I'm really hoping someone will be able to help me. I was previously using this script for my overdispersed gam data: M30 <-gam(efuscus~s(mic, k=7) +temp +s(date)+s(For3k, k=7) + pressure+ humidity, family=negbin(c(1,10)), data=efuscus) My gam.check gave me the attached result. In order to

Hi list, I'm working with gamm models of this sort, using Simon Wood's mgcv library: gm<- gamm(Z~te(x,y),data=DATA,random=list(Group=~1)) gm1<-gamm(Z~te(x,y,by=Factor)+Factor,data=DATA,random=list(Group=~1)) with a dataset of about 70000 rows and 110 levels for Group in order to test whether tensor product smooths vary across factor levels. I was wondering if comparing those two

Hi, I've an issue adding an interaction to a GAMM: My model was of form: gamm1 <- gamm(TOTSR ~ fROT + s(PH) + s(LOI) + s(ASP) + s(SQRT_ELEV) + CANCOV + s(SQRT_TOTCWD) + s(WELLF) + s(WELLN) + s(OLDWDLD) + s(DISTWOOD) + s(Annprec) + s(OLDWDLD:DISTWOOD) + (1|fSITE), family = poisson, data = BIOFOR2) with interaction of s(OLDWDLD:DISTWOOD). However I got this error message below but

Hello I'm analyzing a dichotomous dependent variable (dv) with more than 100 measurements (within-subjects variable: hours24) per subject and more than 100 subjects. The high number of measurements allows me to model more complex temporal trends. I would like to compare different models using GLM, GLMM, GAM and GAMM, basically do demonstrate the added value of GAMs/GAMMs relative to

Hi, I've been using gamm4 to build GAMMs for exploring environmental influences on genetic ancestry. Things have gone well and I have 2 very straightforward questions: 1. I've used method=REML. Am I correct that this is an alternative method for estimating the smooth functions in GAMMs rather than GCV that is often used for GAMs? I've read up on REML and it makes sense, but I'm

Greetings all The help file for GAMM in mgcv indicates that the log likelihood for a GAMM reported using summary(my.gamm$lme) (as an example) is not correct. However, in a past R-help post (included below), there is some indication that the likelihood ratio test in anova.lme(mygamm$lme, mygamm1$lme) is valid. How can I tell if anova.lme results are meaningful (are AIC, BIC, and logLik

Dear all, I am using the "mgcv" package by Simon Wood to estimate an additive mixed model in which I assume normal distribution for the residuals. I would like to test this model vs a standard parametric mixed model, such as the ones which are possible to estimate with "lme". Since the smoothing splines can be written as random effects, is it correct to use an (approximate)

Dear all, I run a gamm with following call : result <- try(gamm(values~ s( VM )+s( RH )+s( TT )+s( PP )+RF+weekend+s(day)+s(julday) ,correlation=corCAR1(form=~ day|month ),data=tmp) )" with mgcv version 1.6.2 No stress about the data, the error is not data-related. I get : Error in isS4(x) : object 'VM' not found What so? I did define the dataframe to be used, and the

Dear R-users, To obtain the percentage of deviance explained when fitting a gam model using the mgcv library is straightforward: summary(object.gam) $dev.expl or alternatively, using the deviance (deviance(object.gam)) of the null and the fitted models, and then using 1 minus the quotient of deviances. However, when a gamm (generalizad aditive mixed model) is fitted, the

Hi all, I would like to fit a gamm model of the form: Y~X+X*f(z) Where f is the smooth function and With random effects on X and on the intercept. So, I try to write it like this: gam.lme<- gamm(Y~ s(z, by=X) +X, random=list(groups=pdDiag(~1+X)) ) but I get the error message : Error in MEestimate(lmeSt, grps) : Singularity in backsolve at level 0, block 1

Dear useRs, I am using the gamm function in the mgcv package to model a smooth relationship between a covariate and my dependent variable, while allowing for quantification of the subjectwise variability in the smooths. What I would like to do is to make subjectwise predictions for plotting purposes which account for the random smooth components of the fit. An example. (sessionInfo() is at

Hi I am an engineer and am running the package mgcv and specifically the command gamm (generalized additive mixed modelling), with random effects. i have a few queries: 1. When I run the command with 1000/2000 observations, it runs ok. However, I would like to see the results as in vis.gam command in the same package, with the 3-d visuals. It appears no such option is available for gamm in the

My data set consist of number of calls (lcin) across Day. I am looking for activity differences between three features (4 sites per feature). I am also looking for peaks of activity across time (Day). I am using a gamm since I believe these are nonlinear trends with nested data. gammdata<-gamm(lcin~Temp+s(Day)+fType+wind+fFeature+Forest+Water+Built, list=fSite,data=data, family=gaussian)

Hi there, My question is about the 'theta' parameter in specification of a NB GAMM. I have fit a GAM with an optimum structure of: SB.gam4<-gam(count~offset(vol_offset)+ s(Depth_m, by=StnF, bs="cs")+StageF*RegionF, family=negbin(1, link=log), data=Zoop_2011[Zoop_2011$SpeciesF=='SB',]) However, this GAM shows heterogeneity in the

Dear R-helpers, I'd like to understand how to test the statistical significance of a random effect in gamm. I am using gamm because I want to test a model with an AR(1) error structure, and it is my understanding neither gam nor gamm4 will do the latter. The data set includes nine short interrupted time series (single case designs in education, sometimes called N-of-1 trials in medicine)

Hello, I am a bit confused about gamm in mgcv. Consulting Wood (2006) or Ruppert et al. (2003) hasn't taken away my confusion. In this code from the gamm help file: b2<-gamm(y~s(x0)+s(x1)+s(x2)+s(x3),family=poisson,random=list(fac=~1)) Am I correct in assuming that we have a random intercept here....but that the amount of smoothing is also changing per level of the