similar to: question on glmmML compared to NLMIXED

Hello! I am using glmmML for a logitic regression with random effect. I use the posterior.mode as an estimate for the random effects. These can be very different from the estimates obtained using SAS , NLMIXED in the random with out= option. (all the fixed and standard error of random effect estimators are almost identical) Can someone explain to me why is that. The codes I use: R:

A new version, 0.65-1, of glmmML is now on CRAN. It is a major rewrite of the inner structures, so frequent updates (bug fixes) may be expected for some time. News: * The Laplace and adaptive Gauss-Hermite approximations to the log likelihood function are fully implemented. The Laplace method is made the default. It should give results you can compare to the results from 'lmer' (for the

A new version, 0.65-1, of glmmML is now on CRAN. It is a major rewrite of the inner structures, so frequent updates (bug fixes) may be expected for some time. News: * The Laplace and adaptive Gauss-Hermite approximations to the log likelihood function are fully implemented. The Laplace method is made the default. It should give results you can compare to the results from 'lmer' (for the

I have uploaded a new version (0.30-2) of glmmML to CRAN today. This is a rather extensive upgrade, mostly internal. Adaptive Gauss-Hermite quadrature (GHQ) is now used for the evaluation of the integrals in the log likelihood function. The user can choose the number of points (default is 16), I _think_ that choosing 1 point will result in a Laplace approximation. The integrals in the score and

I have uploaded a new version (0.30-2) of glmmML to CRAN today. This is a rather extensive upgrade, mostly internal. Adaptive Gauss-Hermite quadrature (GHQ) is now used for the evaluation of the integrals in the log likelihood function. The user can choose the number of points (default is 16), I _think_ that choosing 1 point will result in a Laplace approximation. The integrals in the score and

Dear R friends A while a go I sent an email to the epi-list and later to the help-list and no answer could fully illuminate my question. So Im trying again with a more specific matter. Im trying to work on a script (function) to analyse data from a diagnostic test meta-analysis with random effects. This was first described by an author using SAS witn PROC NLMIXED. Im not an expert in R and much

I'm trying to run a zero-inflated regression for a continuous response variable in R. I'm aware of a gamlss implementation, but I'd really like to try out this algorithm by Dale McLerran that is conceptually a bit more straightforward. Unfortunately, the code is in SAS and I'm not sure how to re-write it for something like nlme (if at all possible - with conditions etc). Does

Dear R-list, I thought that I would let some of you know of a free R package, glmm.ADMB, that can handle mixed models for overdispersed and zero-inflated count data (negativebinomial and poisson). It was built using AD Model Builder software (Otter Research) for random effects modeling and is available (for free and runs in R) at: http://otter-rsch.com/admbre/examples/glmmadmb/glmmADMB.html I

I'd like to estimate an ordinal logistic regression with a random effect for a grouping variable. I do not find a pre-packaged algorithm for this. I've found methods glmmML (package: glmmML) and lmer (package: lme4) both work fine with dichotomous dependent variables. I'd like a model similar to polr (package: MASS) or lrm (package: Design) that allows random effects. I was

Dear All, reading an article by Rodolphe Thiebaut and Helene Jacqmin-Gadda ("Mixed models for longitudinal left-censored repeated measures") I have found this program in SAS proc nlmixed data=TEST QTOL=1E-6; parms sigsq1=0.44 ro=0.09 sigsq2=0.07 sigsqe=0.18 alpha=3.08 beta=0.43; bounds $B!](B1< ro < 1, sigsq1 sigsq2 sigsqe >= 0; pi=2*arsin(1); mu=alpha+beta*TIME+a i+b i*TIME;

I'm trying to use the glmmML package on a Windows machine. When I try to install the package, I get the message: > {pkg <- select.list(sort(.packages(all.available = TRUE))) + if(nchar(pkg)) library(pkg, character.only=TRUE)} Error in dyn.load(x, as.logical(local), as.logical(now)) : unable to load shared library

To account for likely differences between families in naturalization rates, we fitted a generalized linear mixed model, using PROC NLMIXED in SAS10, with the naturalization rate per genus (that is, the number of naturalized species in a genus as a proportion of the total number of introduced species in a genus) as the response variable, a variable coding genera as containing at least one native

Hi there, I am using SAS Proc NLMIXED to maximize a likelihood with multivariate normal random effects. An example is the two part random effects model for repeated measures semi-continous data with a cluster at 0. I use the "model y ~ general(loglike)" statement in Proc NLMIXED, so I can specify a general log likelihood function constructed by SAS programming statements. Then the

Hi, I am trying to convert the following NLMIXED code to NLME, but am running into problems concerning 'Singularity in backsolve'. As I am new to R/S-Plus, I thought I may be missing something in the NLME code. NLMIXED *********** proc nlmixed data=kidney.kidney; parms delta=0.03 gamma=1.1 b1=-0.003 b2=-1.2 b3=0.09 b4=0.35 b5=-1.43 varu=0.5; eta=b1*age+b2*sex+b3*gn+b4*an+b5*pkn+u;

Greetings. Here is sample code, with some comments. It shows how I can simulate data and estimate glm with binomial family when there is no individual level random error, but when I add random error into the linear predictor, I have a difficult time getting reasonable estimates of the model parameters or the variance component. There are no clusters here, just individual level responses, so

Hi, I have a spatial data set with many observations (~50,000) and would like to keep as much data as possible. There is spatial dependence, so I am attempting a mixed model in R with a spherical variogram defining the correlation as a function of distance between points. I have tried nlme, lme, glmmML, and glmmPQL. In all case the matrix needed (seems to be (N^2)/2 - N) is too large for my

A new version of 'glmmML' (0.28-4) is uploaded to CRAN. The most important new feature is the possibility to get a p-value for the test of the hypothesis that the variance of the random effects is zero, on the wishlist of many R users these days! Note two things: (i) glmmML only treats random intercepts for binomial and poisson models, (ii) the p-value is calculated thru bootstrapping

A new version of 'glmmML' (0.28-4) is uploaded to CRAN. The most important new feature is the possibility to get a p-value for the test of the hypothesis that the variance of the random effects is zero, on the wishlist of many R users these days! Note two things: (i) glmmML only treats random intercepts for binomial and poisson models, (ii) the p-value is calculated thru bootstrapping

Dear all, This question is basic but I am stumped. After running the below, I receive the message: "non-integer #successes in a binomial glm!" model1 <- glmmML(y~Brood.Size*Density+Date.Placed+Species+Placed.Emerging+Year+rate.of.parperplot, data = data, cluster= data$Patch, family=binomial(link="logit")) My response variable is sex ratio, and I have learned quickly not

Maybe an R-packages posting guide with an example and an automatic append of a one or two line summary at the end of each article posted - as already done on r-help. On 8/21/06, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: > Hi G?ran, > > >>>>> "GB" == G?ran Brostr?m <goran.brostrom at gmail.com> > >>>>> on Mon, 21 Aug