similar to: loglikelihood and lmer

I have a dataset like this: p aa index x y z sdx sdy sdz delta as ms cur sc 1 821p MET 1 -5.09688 32.8830 -5.857620 1.478200 1.73998 0.825778 13.7883 126.91 92.37 -0.1320180 111.0990 2 821p THR 2 -4.07357 28.6881 -4.838430 0.597674 1.37860 1.165780 13.7207 64.09 50.72 -0.0977129 98.5319 3 821p GLU 3 -5.86733 30.4759

Hello, I have compared the potentials of R and Stata about GLMM, analysing the dataset 'ohio' in the package 'faraway' (the same dataset is analysed with GEE in the book 'Extending the linear model with R' by Julian Faraway). Basically, I've tried the 2 commands 'glmmPQL' and 'glmer' of R and the command 'xtmelogit' of Stata. If I'm not

Hello all R-user I am relative new to the R-environment and also to GLMM, so please don't be irritated if some questions don't make sense. I am using R 2.0.0 on Windows 2000. I investigated the occurrence of insects (count) in different parts of different plants (plantid) and recorded as well some characteristics of the plant parts (e.g. thickness). It is an unbalanced design with 21

I'm estimating two models for data with n = 179 with four clusters (21, 70, 36, and 52) named siteid. I'm estimating a logistic regression model with random intercept and another version with random intercept and random slope for one of the independent variables. fit.1 <- lmer(glaucoma~(1|siteid)+x1 +x2,family=binomial,data=set1,method="ML",

> library(MASS) > attach(bacteria) > table(y) y n y 43 177 > y<-1*(y=="y") > table(y,trt) trt y placebo drug drug+ 0 12 18 13 1 84 44 49 > library(lme4) > model1<-lmer(y~trt+(week|ID),family=binomial,method="PQL") Error in match.arg(method, c("Laplace", "AGQ")) : 'arg' should be one of

Hi, I'm new to R and GLMMs, and I've been unable to find the answers to my questions by trawling through the R help archives. I'm hoping someone here can help me. I'm running an analysis on Seedling survival (count data=Poisson distribution) on restoration sites, and my main interest is in determining whether the Nutrients (N) and water absorbing polymer Gel (G) additions to the

I am analysing binomial data using a generalised mixed effects model. I understand that if I use glmmPQL it is not appropriate to compare AIC values to obtain a minimum adequate model. I am assuming that this means it is also inappropriate to use AIC values from lmer since, when analysing binomial data, lmer also uses PQL methods. However, I wasn't sure so please could somebody clarify

I am analysing some binary data with a mixed effects model using glmmPQL. I am aware that I cannot use the AIC values to help me find the minimum adequate model so how do I perform likelihood ratio tests? I need to fix on the minimum adequate model but I'm not sure of the proper way to do this. Thank you very much, Elizabeth Boakes Elizabeth Boakes PhD Student Institute of Zoology

Dear all, I get an error message when I run my model and I am not sure what to do about it. I try to determine what factors influence the survival of voles. I use a mixed-model because I have several voles per site (varying from 2 to 19 voles). Here is the model: ### fm5 <-lmer(data=cdrgsaou2, alive~factor(pacut)+factor(agecamp)+factor(sex)+ResCondCorp+(1|factor(cdrgsa ou2$ids)),

Dear R users I encounter a problem when i perform a generalized linear mixed model (binary data) with the lmer function (package lme4) with R 2.1.0 on windows XP and the latest version of package "lme4" (0.96-1) and "matrix" (0.96-2) both options "PQL" and "Laplace" for the method argument in lmer function gave me the same results (random and fixed effects

Dear all, dear Prof. Bates, my dependent variable (school absenteeism, truancy[1]) is a binary response for which I am trying to compute an unconditional mixed effects model. I've got observations (monday, wednesday and friday) nested in individuals (ID2), which were nested in classes (KID2) and schools (SID), i.e. a 4-level mixed effects model. In short, I was trying without success. I

Dear list, I am having some problems with extracting Variance Components from a random-effects model: I am running a simple random-effects model using lme: model<-lme(y~1,random=~1|groupA/groupB) which returns the output for the StdDev of the Random effects, and model AIC etc as expected. Until yesterday I was using R v. 2.0, and had no problem in calling the variance components of the

Dear R users, I'm pretty new on using lmer package. My response is binary and I have fixed treatment effect (2 treatments) and random center effect (7 centers). I want to test the effect of treatment by fitting 2 models: Model 1: center effect (random) only Model 2: trt (fixed) + center (random) + trt*center interaction. Then, I want to compare these 2 models with Likelihood Ratio Test.

I use model comparison with glms without mixed effects with anova(modelA,modelB), with mixed effects glm (glmmPQL), this doesn't work. Is there a way to compare model fits with glmmPQL's? Paula M. den Hartog Behavioural Biology Institute of Biology Leiden Leiden University [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Dear R users, I have been having problems getting believable estimates from anova on a model fit from lmer. I get the impression that F is being greatly underestimated, as can be seen by running the example I have given below. First an explanation of what I'm trying to do. I am trying to fit a glmm with binomial errors to some data. The experiment involves 10 shadehouses, divided between

Dear list, I am needing to extract the estimate of overdispersion (deviance / residual degrees of freedom or c-hat) from multiple model objects - so they can then be used to compare the extent of overdispersion among alternative models as well as calculate qausi-AIC values. I have been unable to do this, despite consulting a number of manuals and searching the R-help. I am imaging that in

Hi All, does anyone know if the package GLME by J. Pinheiro is available anywhere in any form? checking on the archive I got that it was at some point, as as a beta version (for S-Plus only, alas)... Cheers, Federico ========================= Federico C.F. Calboli Department of Biology University College London Room 327 Darwin Building Gower Street London WClE 6BT Tel: (+44) 020 7679 4395

Greetings- a reviewer for a paper of mine noted an anomaly in some models I ran using glmmPQL (from the MASS package). Specifically, the models are three-level hierarchical probit models estimated using PQL under R. The anomaly is that the log-likelihoods decrease (or, alternatively -2logLik increases) as variables are added to the null model. This is unusual, and I'm trying to figure out

I have a longitudinal data analysis project. There are 10 observations on each of 15 units, and I'm estimating this with randomly varying intercepts along with an AR1 correction for the error terms within units. There is no correlation across units. Blundering around in R for a long time, I found that for linear/gaussian models, I can use either the MASS method glmmPQL (thanks to

Dear list members, In re-running with GLMM() from the lme4 package a generalized-linear mixed model that I had previously fit with glmmPQL() from MASS, I'm getting a warning of a convergence failure, even when I set the method argument of GLMM() to "PQL": > bang.mod.1 <- glmmPQL(contraception ~ as.factor(children) + cage + urban, + random=~as.factor(children) + cage +