similar to: GAM function in mgcv package

Hi, I need further help with my GAMs. Most models I test are very obviously non-linear. Yet, to be on the safe side, I report the significance of the smooth (default output of mgcv's summary.gam) and confirm it deviates significantly from linearity. I do the latter by fitting a second model where the same predictor is entered without the s(), and then use anova.gam to compare the

I am using gam in mgcv (1.3-22) and trying to use gcv to help with model selection. However, I'm a little confused by the process of assessing GCV scores based on their magnitude (or on relative changes in magnitude). Differences in GCV scores often seem "obvious" with my poisson gams but with negative binomial, the decision seems less clear. My data represent a similar pattern as

hi Using a ts or tprs basis, I expected gcv to decrease when increasing the basis dimension, as I thought this would minimise gcv over a larger subspace. But gcv increased. Here's an example. thanks for any comments. greg #simulate some data set.seed(0) x1<-runif(500) x2<-rnorm(500) x3<-rpois(500,3) d<-runif(500) linp<--1+x1+0.5*x2+0.3*exp(-2*d)*sin(10*d)*x3

Qusetion #1 ********* Model selection in GAM can be done by using: 1. step.gam {gam} : A directional stepwise search 2. gam {mgcv} : Smoothness estimation using GCV or UBRE/AIC criterion Suppose my model starts with a additive model (linear part + spline part). Using gam() {mgcv} i got estimated degrees of freedom(edf) for the smoothing splines. Now I want to use the functional form of my model

Dear all, I'm trying to fit a pure additive model of the following formula : fit <- gam(y~x1+te(x2, x3, bs="cr")) ,with the smoothing parameter estimation method "magic"(default). Regarding this, I have two questions : Question 1 : In some cases the value of "mgcv.conv$fully.converged" becomes "FALSE", which tells me that the method stopped with a

Hi, I am fairly new to GAM and started using package mgcv. I like the fact that optimal smoothing is automatically used (i.e. df are not determined a priori but calculated by the gam procedure). But the mgcv manual warns that p-level for the smooth can be underestimated when df are estimated by the model. Most of the time my p-levels are so small that even doubling them would not result

I have 11 possible predictor variables and use them to model quite a few target variables. In search for a consistent manner and possibly non-manual manner to identify the significant predictor vars out of the eleven I thought the option "select=T" might do. Example: (here only 4 pedictors) first is vanilla with "select=F" >

Hello, I have a question regarding model selection and dropping of terms for GAMs fitted with package mgcv. I am following the approach suggested in Wood (2001), Wood and Augustin (2002). I fitted a saturated model, and I find from the plots that for two of the covariates, 1. The confidence interval includes 0 almost everywhere 2. The degrees of freedom are NOT close to 1 3. The partial

Hi, I have been trying to fit an un-penalised gam in mgcv (in order to get more reliable p-values for hypothesis testing), but I am struggling to get the model to fit sucessfully when I add in a te() interaction. The model I am trying to fit is: gam(count~ s(x1, bs = "ts", k = 4, fx = TRUE) + s(x2, bs = "ts", k = 4, fx = TRUE) + te(x2, x3, bs =

Dear R-experts, I have a question on the formulas used in the gam function of the mgcv package. I am trying to understand the relationships between: y~s(x1)+s(x2)+s(x3)+s(x4) and y~s(x1,x2,x3,x4) Does the latter contain the former? what about the smoothers of all interaction terms? I have (tried to) read the manual pages of gam, formula.gam, smooth.terms, linear.functional.terms but

Dear R-experts, I have a question on the formulas used in the gam function of the mgcv package. I am trying to understand the relationships between: y~s(x1)+s(x2)+s(x3)+s(x4) and y~s(x1,x2,x3,x4) Does the latter contain the former? what about the smoothers of all interaction terms? I have (tried to) read the manual pages of gam, formula.gam, smooth.terms, linear.functional.terms but

Hi, I am using GAMs (package mgcv) to smooth event rates in a penalized regression setting and I was wondering if/how one can select the order of the derivative penalty. For my particular problem the order of the penalty (parameter "m" inside the "s" terms of the formula argument) appears to have a larger effect on the AIC/deviance of the estimated model than the

Hello, in the paper "Avoiding the effects of concurvity in GAM's .." of Figueiras et al. (2003) it is mentioned that in GLM collinearity is taken into account in the calc of se but not in GAM (-> results in confidence interval too narrow, p-value understated, GAM S-Plus version). I haven't found any references to GAM and concurvity or collinearity on the R page. And I

hi I'm puzzled as to the relation between the REML score computed by gam and the formula (4) on p.4 here: http://opus.bath.ac.uk/22707/1/Wood_JRSSB_2011_73_1_3.pdf I'm ok with this for poisson, or for quasipoisson when phi=1. However, when phi differs from 1, I'm stuck. #simulate some data library(mgcv) set.seed(1) x1<-runif(500) x2<-rnorm(500)

Dear listers, I'm using gam(from mgcv) for semi-parametric regression on small and noisy datasets(10 to 200 observations), and facing a problem of overfitting. According to the book(Simon N. Wood / Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R), it is suggested to avoid overfitting by inflating the effective degrees of freedom in GCV evaluation with increased "gamma"

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

What does Generalized Cross Validation score mean. I preform and ordisurf on an ordination (nmds) with an environmental variable. I am trying to figure out "how well" the environmental varibles predict/explain the sites placements in species space. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Any pointers to literature... would be welcome. thanks in advance, -- Stephen Sefick Research

I have a general question about using thin plate splines in the surf and ordisurf routines. My rudimentary knowledge of a gam is that with each predictive variable there is a different smooth for each one and then they are added together with no real interaction term (because they don't handle this well?). Now, If I have two variables that have a high D^2 score and a low GCV score (I am

Dear R-devel, I am experiencing issues with running GAM models using mclapply, it fails to return any values if the data input becomes large. For example here the code runs fine with a df of 100 rows, but fails at 1000. library(mgcv) library(parallel) > df <- data.frame( + x = 1:100, + y = 1:100 + ) > > mclapply(1:2, function(i, df) { + fit <- gam(y ~ s(x, bs =

Hi,everyone, I am studying the generalized additive model and employ the package 'mgcv' developed by professor Wood. However,I can not understand the example listed in check.in function. For example, library(mgcv) set.seed(1) dat <- gamSim(1,n=400,scale=2) ## fit a GAM with quite low `k' b<-gam(y~s(x0,k=6)+s(x1,k=6)+s(x2,k=6)+s(x3,k=6),data=dat) plot(b,pages=1,residuals=TRUE)