similar to: save/load + all.equal on reference class objects

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 +

Hello, R community, I have been using the lmer and mcmcsamp functions in R with some difficulty. I do not believe this is my code or data, however, because my attempts to use the sample code and 'sleepstudy' data provided with the lme4 packaged (and used on several R-Wiki pages) do not return the same results as those indicated in the help pages. For instance: > sessionInfo() R

Dear All, I am working with linear mixed-effects models using the lme4 package in R. I created a model with the lmer function including some main effects, a two-way interaction and a random effect. Now I am searching how I could incorporate an interaction between the random effect and one of the fixed effects. I tried to express the interaction in:

Full_Name: Dale Barr Version: 2.5.1 (patched) OS: Ubuntu linux x86_64 Submission from: (NULL) (138.23.70.108) When RMySQL is loaded in before lme4, the summary() function for lmer objects in the lme4 packages produces the following error: Error in printMer(object) : no slot of name "status" for this object of class "table" When RMySQL is loaded AFTER lme4, however, no such

Dear all, I'm curious about how to interpret the results of the following code. The first model is directly from the help page of lmer; the second is the same model but using the Gamma family with log link. The fixed effects make sense, because y = 251.40510 + 10.46729 * Days is about the same as log(y) = 5.53613298 + 0.03502057 * Days but the random effects seem quite

>>>>> "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

My question concerns the logic behind hypothesis tests for fixed-effect terms in models fitted with lme. Suppose the levels of Subj indicate a grouping structure (k subjects) and Trt is a two-level factor (two treatments) for which there are several (n) responses y from each treatment and subject combination. If one suspects a subject by treatment interaction, either of the following models seem

I have the following code: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- result <- matrix(NA, nrow=1, ncol=5) for(i in 1:(nsnp-1)) { for(j in (i+1):nsnp){ tempsnp1 <- data.lme[,i] tempsnp2 <- data.lme[,j] fm1 <- lme(trait~sex+age+rmtemp.b+fc+tempsnp1+tempsnp2+tempsnp1*tempsnp2, random=~1|famid, na.action=na.omit) fm2 <-

Dear all, I found a problem with 'lme4'. Basically, once you load the package 'aod' (Analysis of Overdispersed Data), the functions 'lmer' and 'glmer' don't work anymore: library(lme4) (fm1 <- lmer(Reaction ~ Days + (Days|Subject), sleepstudy)) (gm1 <- glmer(cbind(incidence, size - incidence) ~ period + (1 | herd), family = binomial, data

Dear R community, I'm trying to understand this behavior of TukeyHSD. My goal is to obtain defensible, labelled multiple comparisons of an interaction term. Firstly, if I plot the TukeyHSD from the model that calculates its own interactions, then the y-axis labels appear to be reflected on their median when compared to the text output of the TukeyHSD statement. The labels are integers.

Dear all, I noticed the following in the call of lme using msVerbose. fm1 <- lme(distance ~ age, data = Orthodont, control = lmeControl(msVerbose=T)) 9 318.073: -0.567886 0.152479 1.98021 10 318.073: -0.567191 0.152472 1.98009 11 318.073: -0.567208 0.152473 1.98010 fm2 <- lme(distance ~ age, random =~age, data = Orthodont,

Hello: Will someone PLEASE help me with this problem. This is the third time I've posted it. When I appply anova() to two equations estimated using glmmPQL, I get a complaint, > anova(fm1, fm2) Error in anova.lme(fm1, fm2) : Objects must inherit from classes "gls", "gnls" "lm","lmList", "lme","nlme","nlsList", or

The subject says it all really. Question 1. Here is some code created to illustrate my problem, can anyone spot where I'm going wrong? Question 2. The reason I'm following a manual specification of models relates to the fact that in reality I am using mgcv::gam, and I'm not aware that dredge is able to separate individual smooth terms out of say s(a,b). Hence an additional request,

Dear All -- I am trying to use within a little table producing code an anova comparison of two gls fitted objects, contained in a list of such object, obtained using nlme function gls. The anova procedure fails to locate the second of the objects. The following code, borrowed from the help page of anova.gls, exemplifies: --------------- start example code --------------- library(nlme) ##

Paul: I may have found the issue (which is similar to your conclusion). I checked using egsingle in the mlmRev package as these individuals are strictly nested in this case: library(mlmRev) library(nlme) fm1 <- lme(math ~ year, random=~1|schoolid/childid, egsingle) fm2 <- lmer(math ~ year +(1|schoolid:childid) + (1|schoolid), egsingle) Checking the summary of both models, the output is

Dear people of the help list I am drying to analyze my data using the 'lmer' function and I keep having problems. This is the model: > fm1<-lmer(dbh~spec+scheme+(1|Plot),data=d, REML=FALSE). I analyse tree size (dbh) of 3 different species (spec) and 3 planting schemes (scheme). I have 5 plots, which I hope to model as a random factor. (However, the subsequent output is based on

Hello: Let me rephrase my question to attract interest in the problem I'm having. When I appply anova() to two equations estimated using glmmPQL, I get a complaint, > anova(fm1, fm2) Error in anova.lme(fm1, fm2) : Objects must inherit from classes "gls", "gnls" "lm","lmList", "lme","nlme","nlsList", or "nls"

Hi there, I have a data frame as listed below: > Ca.P.Biomass.A P Biomass 1 334.5567 0.2870000 2 737.5400 0.5713333 3 894.5300 0.6393333 4 782.3800 0.5836667 5 857.5900 0.6003333 6 829.2700 0.5883333 I have fit the data using logistic, Michaelis?Menten, and linear model, they all give significance. > fm1 <- nls(Biomass~SSlogis(P, phi1, phi2, phi3), data=Ca.P.Biomass.A)

Dear Friends, Please note that in the following CI lower > CI higher: > require(lmer) > require(gmodels) > fm2 <- lmer(Reaction ~ Days + (1|Subject) + (0+Days|Subject), sleepstudy) > ci(fm2) Estimate CI lower CI upper Std. Error p-value (Intercept) 251.66693 266.06895 238.630280 7.056447 0 Days 10.52773 13.63372 7.389946 1.646900

Hello: I am really stuck on this problem. Why do I get an error message with anova() when I compare these two equations? Hope someone can help. ANDREW ____________________________ > fm1 <- glmmPQL(choice ~ day + stereotypy, + random = ~ 1 | bear, data = learning, family = binomial) > fm2 <- glmmPQL(choice ~ day + envir + stereotypy, + random = ~ 1 |