similar to: definition of AIC and BIC in gls

I'm using R 2.0.1. I looked in the email archives but didn't see anything on this topic. I've noticed a surprising (to me) difference between AIC and BIC: > methods("AIC") [1] AIC.default* AIC.logLik* > methods("BIC") [1] BIC.gls* BIC.lm* BIC.lme* BIC.lmList* BIC.logLik* BIC.nls* The BIC.gls BIC.lm BIC.lme BIC.lmList and BIC.nls functions appear

Dear Colleagues, We are using the phylog.gls.fit() function from the R package "PHYLOGR" (Diaz-Uriarte R, Garland T: PHYLOGR: Functions for phylogenetically based statistical analyses. 2007. Available at [http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/PHYLOGR/index.html]) to correct for lack of independence between data points. (In our particular case, the lack of independence is due to

A couple weeks ago I posted a message on this topic to r-help, the response was that this seemed like odd behavior, and that I ought to post it to one of the developer lists. I posted to r-sig-mixed-models, but didn't get any response. So, with good intentions, I decided to try posting once more, but to this more general list. The goal is (1) FYI, to make you aware of this issue, in case it

I'd like to compare two models which were fitted using gls, however I'm having trouble interpreting the results of gls. If any of you could offer me some advice, I'd greatly appreciate it. Short explanation of models: These two models have the same fixed-effects structure (two independent, linear effects), and differ only in that the second model includes a corExp structure for

Hi All, How can extract AIC,BIC from a fitted Garch model? -- SUMANTA BASAK. [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Hi all, I would like to know how the BIC criterion is calculated for models estimated using gls( ) function. I read in Pinheiro & Bates (2000) p84 that BIC = -2logL + npar*log(N) (for the ML method), or BIC = -2logLR + npar*log(N-p) (for the REML method) but when I use any of these formulae I don't obtain the result given by R. Thanks in advance for any help. Eve CORDA Office national

I am trying to fit a generalised least squares model using gls in the nlme package. The model seems to fit very well when I plot the fitted values against the original values, and the model parameters have quite narrow confidence intervals (all are significant at p<5%). The problem is that the log likelihood is always given as -Inf. This doesn't seem to make sense because the model

R 2.3.0, all packages up to date Linux, SuSE 10.0 Hi I want to calculate AIC or BIC from several results from mle calculation. I found the AIC function, but it does not seem to work with objects of class mle - If I execute the following: ml1 <- mle(...) AIC(ml1) I get the following error messale: Error in logLik(object) : no applicable method for "logLik" Therefore I am using the

Hi all, I am having issues comparing models with lmer. As an example, when I run the code below the model summaries (AIC, BIC, loglik) differ between the summary() and anova() commands. Can anyone clear up what's wrong? Thank you! Darren Ward library(lme4) data(sleepstudy) fm1<-lmer(Reaction ~ Days + (1|Subject), sleepstudy) summary(fm1) fm2<-lmer(Reaction ~ Days +

Hi! I try to explain the efffect of (1) forest where i took samples's soils (* Lugar*: categorical variable with three levels), (2) nitrogen addition treatments (*Tra*: categorical variable with two levels) on total carbon concentration's soil samples (*C: *continue* *variable) during four months of sampling (*Time:* categorical and ordered variable with four levels). I fitted the

>>>>> "MM" == Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> >>>>> on Tue, 18 May 2010 12:37:21 +0200 writes: >>>>> "GaGr" == Gabor Grothendieck <ggrothendieck at gmail.com> >>>>> on Mon, 17 May 2010 09:45:00 -0400 writes: GaGr> BIC seems like something that would logically go into stats

Hi, I have a problem with a regression I try to run. I did an estimation of the market model with daily data. You can see to output below: /> summary(regression_resn) Time series regression with "ts" data: Start = -150, End = -26 Call: dynlm(formula = ror_resn ~ ror_spi_resn) Residuals: Min 1Q Median 3Q Max -0.0255690 -0.0030378 0.0002787

Hi: The gls function I used in my code is the following fm<-gls(y~x,correlation=corARMA(p=2) ) My question is how to extact the AR(2) parameters from "fm". The object "fm" is the following. How can I extract the correlation parameters Phi1 and Phi2 from "fm"? These two parametrs is not in the "coef" componenet of "fm". Thanks a

Hi, I am working with R version 2.1.0, and I seem to have run into what looks like a bug. I get the same error message when I run R on Windows as well as when I run it on Linux. When I call anova to do a LR test from inside a function, I get an error. The same call works outside of a function. It appears to not find the right environment when called from inside a function. I have provided

list, i am using lmer to fit multilevel models and trying to use anova to compare the models. however, whenever i run the anova, the AIC, BIC and loglik are different from the original model output- as below. can someone help me out with why this is happening? (i'm hoping the output assocaited with the anova is right!). thank you, darren > unconditional<-lmer(log50 ~ 1 + (1 |

Hello all. I was wondering if the logLike.nls() and logLike.nlme() functions are still being used. Neither function seems to be available in the most recent release of R (1.9.1). The following is contained in the help file for logLik(): "classes which already have methods for this function include: 'glm', 'lm', 'nls' and 'gls', 'lme' and others in

Hello all, Is AIC calculated incorrectly in lmer? It appears as though it uses AIC = -2*logLik - 2*#parms, instead of -2*LogLik + 2*#parms? Below is output from one of many models I have tried: Generalized linear mixed model fit using PQL Formula: cswa ~ pcov.ess1k + (1 | year) Data: ptct50.5 Family: poisson(log link) AIC BIC logLik deviance 224.8466 219.19 -114.4233 228.8466

Dear R-users I am relatively new to R, i hope my many novice questions are welcome. I have problems accessing some objects (specifically the random effects, correlation structure and variance function) from an object of class gls and lme. I used the following models: yah <- gls (outcome~ -1 + as.factor(Trial):as.factor(endpoint)+

Hello, I am comparing models made with nlme functions and non-nlme functions, based on Akaike's AIC. The AIC values I get for exactly the same model formulation --for example a linear model with no random effects fit with gls and lm, respectively-- do not fit, although the values of the four model parameters are exactly the same. For example: m1 <- gls(height ~ age, data = Loblolly) m2

Hi, I have fitted a model using a glm() approach and using a gls() approach (but without correcting for spatially autocorrelated errors). I have noticed that although these models are the same (as they should be), the AIC value differs between glm() and gls(). Can anyone tell me why they differ? Thanks, Geertje ~~~~ Geertje van der Heijden PhD student Tropical Ecology School of Geography