similar to: GAM vs. MGCV packages

Hi all, My question concerns 2 error messages; one in the gam package and one in the mgcv package (see below). I have read help files and Chambers and Hastie book but am failing to understand how I can solve this problem. Could you please tell me what I must adjust so that the command does not generate error message? I am trying to achieve model selection for a GAM which is required for

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" >

Hi Gam in mgcv package is predicting negative values which should not be the case despite all the predictors and response variables are positive. Tried to use log link function but it did not help. Please help sunil -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/negative-prediction-by-gam-%28mgcv-package%29-tp20494965p20494965.html Sent from the R help mailing list archive at

I would like to request help with the following: I am trying to use a Generalized Additive Model (gam) to examine the density distribution of fish as a function of latitude and longitude as continuous variables, and year as a categorical variable. The model is written as:   gam.out   <-  gam(Density ~ s(Lat) + s(Lon) + as.factor(Year))   The fitted model prediction of the link function is

Dear List, I'm getting an error in mgcv, and I can't figure out where it comes from. The setup is the following: I've got a fitted GAM object called "MI", and a vector of "prediction data" (with default values for predictors). I feed this into predict.gam(object, newdata = whatever) via the following function: makepred = function(varstochange,val){ for

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

Dear R-experts, I am trying to fit a GAM with 2 binary predictors (variables coded 0,1). I guess I cannot just smooth binary variables. By the way I code them as 0=no,1=yes, then mgcv will think those variables are numeric.? I have tried to change 0 and 1 in no and yes. It does not work. How to solve my problem. Here below my toy example. Many thanks. Best, Sacha ? ########################

I am trying to test out several mgcv::gam models in a scalar-on-function regression analysis. The following is the 'hierarchy' of models I would like to test: (1) Y_i = a + integral[ X_i(t)*Beta(t) dt ] (2) Y_i = a + integral[ F{X_i(t)}*Beta(t) dt ] (3) Y_i = a + integral[ F{X_i(t),t} dt ] equivalents for discrete data might be: 1) Y_i = a + sum_t[ L_t * X_it * Beta_t ] (2) Y_i

Dear list, does anybody know whether there is a way to easily retrieve the so called "partial residuals" of a gam fit with package mgcv? The partial residuals are the residuals you would get if you would "leave out" a particular predictor and are the dots in the plots created by plot(gam.object,residuals=TRUE) residuals.gam() gives me whole model residuals and

Dear all, I run the GAMs (generalized additive models) in gam(mgcv) using the following codes. m.gam <-gam(mark~s(x)+s(y)+s(lstday2004)+s(ndvi2004)+s(slope)+s(elevation)+disbinary,family=binomial(logit),data=point) And two repeated warnings appeared. Warnings$B!'(B 1: In gam.fit(G, family = G$family, control = control, gamma = gamma, ... : Algorithm did not converge 2: In gam.fit(G,

Dear all, I've now spent a couple of days trying to learn R and, in particular, the gam() function, and I now have a few questions and reflections regarding the latter. Maybe these things are implemented in some way that I'm not yet aware of or have perhaps been decided by the R community to not be what's wanted. Of course, my lack of complete theoretical understanding of what

Sometimes, for specific models, I get this error from predict.gam in library mgcv: Error in complete.cases(object) : negative length vectors are not allowed Here's an example: model.calibrate <- gam(meansalesw ~ s(tscore,bs="cs",k=4), data=toplot, weights=weight, gam.method="perf.magic") > test <- predict(model.calibrate,newdata) Error in

Dear Sacha, use glm() in this case. I'd rather code the covariable as TRUE / FALSE or as a factor. Best regards, ir. Thierry Onkelinx Statisticus / Statistician Vlaamse Overheid / Government of Flanders INSTITUUT VOOR NATUUR- EN BOSONDERZOEK / RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR NATURE AND FOREST Team Biometrie & Kwaliteitszorg / Team Biometrics & Quality Assurance thierry.onkelinx at inbo.be

Hello, I have been trying to find out whether it is possible to use more than one offset in a gam (in mgcv). The reason I would like to do this is to 1) account for area surveyed in a Poisson model of sightings of porpoises within defined grid cells (each cell has a slightly different area) and 2) account for detection probability within each grid cell (some grid cells are further away from the

Hi, I am using the gam function in the mgcv package, I have random effects in my model (bs="re") this has worked fine, but after I updated the mgcv package to version 1.7-19 I recive an error message when I run the model. > fit1<-gam(IV~s(RUTE,bs="re")+s(T13)+s(H40)+factor(AAR)+s(V3)+s(G1)+s(H1)+s(V1)+factor(LEDD),data=data5,method="ML") > summary.gam(fit1)

Hi everyone, I can't figure out how to extract by-factor random effect adjustments from a gam model (mgcv package). Example (from ?gam.vcomp): library(mgcv) set.seed(3) dat <- gamSim(1,n=400,dist="normal",scale=2) a <- factor(sample(1:10,400,replace=TRUE)) b <- factor(sample(1:7,400,replace=TRUE)) Xa <- model.matrix(~a-1) ## random main effects Xb <-

In Dr. Wood's book on GAM, he suggests in section 4.1.6 that it might be useful to shrink a single smooth by adding S=S+epsilon*I to the penalty matrix S. The context was the need to be able to shrink the term to zero if appropriate. I'd like to do this in order to shrink the coefficients towards zero (irrespective of the penalty for "wiggliness") - but not necessarily all the

Hi everyone, I ran a binomial GAM consisting of a tensor product of two continuous variables, a continuous parametric term and crossed random intercepts on a data set with 13,042 rows. When trying to plot the tensor product with vis.gam(), I get the following error message: Error in persp.default(m1, m2, z, col = col, zlim = c(min.z, max.z), xlab = view[1], : invalid 'z' limits In

Hi, I am using mgcv:gam and have developed a model with 5 smoothed predictors and one factor. gam1 <- gam(log.sp~ s(Spr.precip,bs="ts") + s(Win.precip,bs="ts") + s( Spr.Tmin,bs="ts") + s(P.sum.Tmin,bs="ts") + s( Win.Tmax,bs="ts") +factor(site),data=dat3) The total deviance explained = 70.4%. I would like to extract the variance explained

Dear list, I fitted the same GAM model using directly the function gam(mgcv) ... then as a parameter of another function that capture the warnings messages (see below). In the first case, there is no warning message printed, but in the last one, the function find two warning messages stating "matrix not positive definite" So my question is: Do I have to worry about those warnings and