similar to: model comparison + use of offset in glmmPQL

Hi ! I try to compare some models obtained from glmmPQL. model1 <- glmmPQL(y~red*yellow+I(red^2)+I(yellow^2)+densite8+I(densite8^2)+freq8_4 +I(freq8_4^2), random=~1|num, binomial); model2 <- glmmPQL(y~red*yellow+I(red^2)+I(yellow^2)+densite8+I(densite8^2)+freq8_4 , random=~1|num, binomial); anova(model1, model2) here is the answer : Erreur dans anova.lme(model1, model2) : Objects must

Dear R-users, I am currently trying to switch from SAS to R, and am not very familiar with R yet, so forgive me if this question is irrelevant. If I try to find the significance of the fixed factor "spikes" in a generalized linear mixed model, with "site" nested within "zone" as a random factor, I compare following two models with the anova function:

Dear all, for a cross-validation I have to use predict.glmmPQL() , where the formula of the corresponding glmmPQL call is not given explicitly, but constructed using as.formula. However, this does not work as expected: x1<-rnorm(100); x2<-rbinom(100,3,0.5); y<-rpois(100,2) mydata<-data.frame(x1,x2,y) library(MASS) # works as expected model1<-glmmPQL(y~x1, ~1 | factor(x2),

Hi ! We study the effect of several variables on fruit set for 44 individuals (plants). For each individual, we have the number of fruits, the number of flowers and a value for each variable. Here is our first model in R : y <- cbind(indnbfruits,indnbflowers); model1 <-glm(y~red*yellow+I(red^2)+I(yellow^2)+densite8+I(densite8^2)+freq8_4+I (freq8_4^2), quasibinomial); - We have

Dear all, I'm using R function "glmmPQL" in "MASS" package for generalized linear mixed model considering the temporal correlations in random effect. There are 1825 observations in my data, in which the random effect is called "Date", and there are five levels in "Date", each repeats 365 times. When I tried

Hello, I have a simple theorical question about regresion... Let's suppose I have this: Model 1: Y = B0 + B1*X1 + B2*X2 + B3*X3 and Model 2: Y = B0 + B2*X2 + B3*X3 I.E. Model1 = lm(Y~X1+X2+X3) Model2 = lm(Y~X2+X3) The Ajusted R-Square for Model1 is 0.9 and the Ajusted R-Square for Model2 is 0.99, among many other significant improvements. And I want to do the anova test to choose the best

Hello all, I've become confused by the output produced by a call to anova(model1,model2). First a brief background. My model used to predict final tree height is summarised here: Df Sum Sq Mean Sq F value Pr(>F) Treatment 2 748.35 374.17 21.3096 7.123e-06 *** HeightInitial 1 0.31 0.31 0.0178 0.89519

Dear useRs, I am fitting a mixed model using the function lmer from the package lme4, but I have some problems when I try to test the effect of my factors of interest. First let me explain the structure of the model: I'm measuring animal movements. Explicitly, I am interested in displacement (straight-line distance from an initial point). Displacements are measured longitudinally, with one

R-help: I am trying to decide between using a multiple linear regression or a linear mixed effects model for my data: model1 <- lm (responsevariable ~ predictor1 + predictor2 + predictor3 + predictor4, data= data) model2 <- lme (responsevariable ~ predictor1 + predictor2 + predictor3 + predictor4, random = ~1 | site, data= data) anova (model1, model2) but I keep getting the

Dear R users, i'm using a custom function to fit ancova models to a dataset. The data are divided into 12 groups, with one dependent variable and one covariate. When plotting the data, i'd like to add separate regression lines for each group (so, 12 lines, each with their respective individual slopes). My 'model1' uses the group*covariate interaction term, and so the coefficients

I have a question about how to compare a GLM with a GAM model using anova function. A GLM is performed for example: model1 <-glm(formula = exitus ~ age+gender+diabetes, family = "binomial", na.action = na.exclude) A second nested model could be: model2 <-glm(formula = exitus ~ age+gender, family = "binomial", na.action = na.exclude) To compare these two GLM

I am using anova.lm to compare 3 linear models. Model 1 has 1 variable, model 2 has 2 variables and model 3 has 3 variables. All models are fitted to the same data set. anova.lm(model1,model2) gives me: Res.Df RSS Df Sum of Sq F Pr(>F) 1 135 245.38 2 134 184.36 1 61.022 44.354 6.467e-10 *** anova.lm(model1,model2,model3) gives

Full_Name: Menelaos Stavrinides Version: 1.3. 1 OS: Windows 98 Submission from: (NULL) (193.129.76.90) When model simplification is used in glm (binomial errors) and anova is used two compare two competitive models one can use either an "F" or a "Chi" test. R always performs an F test (Although when test="Chi" the test is labeled as Chi, there isn't any

I am having difficulty extracting specific results from the model object. The following code shows where I am stuck. I want to run resamplings of a data set. For each I want to extract a particular F for the contrasts. If I run a very simple model (e.g. model1 <- aov(time~group) ) I can get the relevant coefficients, for example, by using "model1$coefficients". That's fine.

Hello, I am using the following model model1=lmer(PairFrequency~MatingPair+(1|DrugPair)+(1|DrugPair:MatingPair), data=MateChoice, REML=F) 1. After reading around through the R help, I have learned that the above code is the right way to analyze a mixed model with the MatingPair as the fixed effect, DrugPair as the random effect and the interaction between these two as the random effect as well.

Hi all, This is partly a statistical question as well as a question about R, but I am stumped! I have count data from various sites across years. (Not all of the sites in the study appear in all years). Each site has its own habitat score "habitat" that remains constant across all years. I want to know if counts declined faster on sites with high "habitat" scores. I can

Dear r-helpers, Spencer Graves and Manual Morales proposed the following methods to simulate p-values in lme4: ************preliminary************ require(lme4) require(MASS) summary(glm(y ~ lbase*trt + lage + V4, family = poisson, data = epil), cor = FALSE) epil2 <- epil[epil$period == 1, ] epil2["period"] <- rep(0, 59); epil2["y"] <- epil2["base"]

Hello Everyone,   I've been learning to use R in my spare time over the past several months. I've read about 7-8 books on the subject. Lately I've been testing what I've learned by trying to replicate the analyses from some of my SAS books. This helps me make sure I know how to use R properly and also helps me to understand how the two programs are similar and different.   Below is

Hi, I'm working on fitting a glm model to my data using Gamma error structure and reciprocal link. I've been using dropterm (MASS) in the model simplification process, but the F values from analysis of deviance tables reported by dropterm and anova functions are different - sometimes significantly so. However, the reported residual deviances, degrees of freedom, etc. are not different.

Dear all, I am fitting a glm to count data using poison errors with the log link. My goal is to test for the significance of model terms by calling the anova function on two nested models following the recommendation in Michael Crawley's guide to Statistical Computing. Without going into too much detail, essentially, I have a small overdispersion problem (errors do not fit the poisson