similar to: Log-likelihood calculation in lme

Hello. I am trying to determine whether I should be using ML or REML methods to estimate a linear mixed model. In the book by Pinheiro & Bates (Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS, page 76) they state that one difference between REML and ML is that « LME models with different fixed-effects structures fit using REML cannot be compared on the basis of their restricted likelihoods. In

Dear R-Users, Is it possible to get the covariance matrix from an lme model that did not converge ? I am doing a simulation which entails fitting linear mixed models, using a "for loop". Within each loop, i generate a new data set and analyze it using a mixed model. The loop stops When the "lme function" does not converge for a simulated dataset. I want to

Running the Chapter 4 examples in Pinheiro & Bates' "Mixed-Effects Models in S and S-PLUS" (2000), I get a message that the default optimizer doesn't converge, but using "optim" for the optimizer results in convergence: > > library(nlme) > > fm1IGF.lis <- lmList(IGF) > > fm1IGF.lme <- lme(fm1IGF.lis) > Error in lme.formula(fixed =

Hi, I am trying to parameterize the following mixed model (following Piepho and Ogutu 2002), to test for a trend over time, using multiple sites: y[ij]=mu+b[j]+a[i]+w[j]*(beta +t[i])+c[ij] where: y[ij]= a response variable at site i and year j mu = fixed intercept Beta=fixed slope w[j]=constant representing the jth year (covariate) b[j]=random effect of jth year, iid N(0,sigma2[b]) a[i]=random

I have 2 questions on ANOVA with 1 between subjects factor and 2 within factors. 1. I am confused on how to do the analysis with aov because I have seen two examples on the web with different solutions. a) Jon Baron (http://www.psych.upenn.edu/~baron/rpsych/rpsych.html) does 6.8.5 Example 5: Stevens pp. 468 - 474 (one between, two within) between: gp within: drug, dose aov(effect ~ gp * drug *

Hi, this is my first time using the nlme package, and I ran into the following puzzling problem. I estimated a mixed effects model using lme, once using groupedData, once explicitly stating the equations. I had the following outputs. All the coefficients were similar, but they're always slightly different, making me think that it's not due to numerical error. Also, what is the

Dear R gurus, I am trying to work out the problem given in Nested design - Montgomery - Design of Experiments p.561 I have attached a pdf of the data as well the anova table. It is a mixed model with Supplier as fixed effect and batches within the supplier as random effects. I am able to work out the error stratums as below using aov. Which agrees perfectly with the book example

Dear R users, I'm trying to fit a simple random intercept model with a fixed intercept. Suppose I want to assign a weight w_i to the i-th contribute to the log-likelihood, i.e. w_i * logLik_i where logLik_i is the log-likelihood for the i-th subject. I want to maximize the likelihood for N subjects Sum_i {w_i * logLik_i} Here is a simple example to reproduce

Hello, How do I get the standard deviations for the random effects out of the lme object? I feel like there's probably a simple way of doing this, but I can't see it. Using the first example from the documentation: > fm1 <- lme(distance ~ age, data = Orthodont) # random is ~ age > fm1 Linear mixed-effects model fit by REML Data: Orthodont Log-restricted-likelihood:

Dear Friends, I am writing to seek any help on "lme" error message. I am using lme to do Mixed-model linear regression. I use my simulated data. However, sometimes, I get the following error message, which I do not understand. "Error in solve.default(pdMatrix(a, fact=TRUE)): system is computationally sigular" I would appreciate any help about it. Thanks a lot Jingyuan Fu

Dear R list members, I've turned up a strange discrepancy between results obtained from the lme function in the nlme package in R and results obtained with lme in S-PLUS. I'm using version 3.1-24 of nlme in R 1.4.1 under Windows 2000, and both S-PLUS 2000 and 6.0, again under Windows 2000. I've noticed discrepancies in a couple of instances. Here's one, using data from Bryk

Hello everyone, I hope this is a fair enough question, but I don’t have access to a copy of Bates and Pinheiro. It is probably quite obvious but the answer might be of general interest. If I fit a fixed effect with an added quadratic term and then do it as an orthogonal polynomial using maximum likelihood I get the expected result- they have the same logLik.

Hi, all, I have a question about random effects model. I am dealing with a three-factor experiment dataset. The response variable y is modeled against three factors: Samples, Operators, and Runs. The experimental design is as follow: 4 samples were randomly chosen from a large pool of test samples. Each of the 4 samples was analyzed by 4 operators, randomly selected from a group of

Hello, I would appreciate if somebody could help me clear my mind about the below issues. I have a factorial experiment to study the effects of Grazing and Fire on Forest biomass production. The experimental unit (to which the treatment combinations are applied) are PLOTs. The measures were made repeatedly for 13 years. I am planning to use the linear mixed effect model function lme in R for this.

I am trying to use lme to fit a mixed effects model to get the same results as when using the following SAS code: proc mixed; class refseqid probeid probeno end; model expression=end logpgc / ddfm=satterth; random probeno probeid / subject=refseqid type=cs; lsmeans end / diff cl; run; There are 3 genes (refseqid) which is the large grouping factor, with 2 probeids nested within each refseqid,

Hi guys again, it seems I haven't been doing the maximum likelihood estimation correctly. I quote below, can someone explain to me please what does it mean that the 2nd and 3rd derivatives of the function equals zero and how to compute that in R. "We have our initial estimated, subjective parameters for the gamma mixture and we have our likelihood that is the mixture of negative

Dear R-users, I have longitudinal data and would like to fit a model where both the variance-covariance matrix of the random effects and the residual variance are conditional on a (binary) grouping variable. I guess the model would have the following form (in hierarchical notation) Yi|bi,k ~ N(XiB+Zibi, sigmak*Ident) bi|k ~ N(0, Dk) K~Bernoulli(p) I can obtain different sigmas (sigma0 and

Greetings, 1) Is there a nice way of extracting the variance estimates from an lme fit? They don't seem to be part of the lme object. 2) In a series of simulations, I am finding that with ML fitting one of my random effect variances is sometimes being estimated as essentially zero with massive CI instead of the finite value it should have, whilst using REML I get the expected value. I guess

Dear R - Users I have some problems fitting a linear mixed effects model using the lme function (nlme library). A sample data is as shown at the bottom of this mail. I fit my linear mixed model using the following R code: bmr <-lme (outcome~ -1 + as.factor(endpoint)+ as.factor(endpoint):trt, data=datt, random=~-1 + as.factor(endpoint) + as.factor(endpoint):trt|as.factor(Trial),

Dear members of the flac-dev list, I'm writing to ask for feedback from the FLAC community regarding the possibility of standardizing the FLAC specification through the Internet Engineering Task Force. I'm working with MediaArea on the PREFORMA project which focuses on building conformance checkers for Matroska and FFV1. Since Matroska and FFV1 are not yet formally standardized, this