With this understanding, this article will demonstrate some of the inference tools available in R to quantify the uncertainty in the estimates from lme4 mixed models. Recall that all real world (finite non-asymptotic) statistics are estimates and one of the goals of statistics is to quantify the uncertainty of estimates. Although the asymptotics of mixed models are not as classically clean as in OLS and GLM models, inference can still be useful to guide decisions. These issues are raised to let you to know about the limitations of inference with mixed models and what can be done. This article does not discuss the details of these issues. Parametric bootstraps which can more easily account for the correlation in the model are more typically used for inference in mixed models than bootstraps, which are non-parametric. The correlation structure within the data complicates using bootstrap procedures to test these statistics which do not have known distributions. Tests of parameters are valid only on the interior of their space and not on the border. Since the variance must be greater than or equal to zero, a test of zero is on the border of the parameter space. Assuming we can find a good value for the degrees of freedom, we still can not count on our test statistic (from likelihood ratio tests and the like) to be F or chi distributed with the penalty applied to the model.Īnother source of complications is testing the significance of a variance parameter, \(\boldsymbol\). So what would be the correct degrees of freedom to use for the cost to estimate this one variance parameter? One? twenty? Something in between? Unfortunately there is no generally accepted theory which provides an answer to this question. Since these twenty indicators have a shrinkage factor applied to them, we do not really need twenty degrees of freedom. The design matrix used includes the twenty indicator variables and we would normally associate twenty degrees of freedom with these twenty indicators. We would typically associate one degree of freedom with one estimated value. There is only one parameter for these twenty indicators in the model. The design matrix used to estimate the model parameters uses twenty indicator variables for these twenty levels. For example a variance parameter, say r1, maybe estimated from twenty levels in a model. This penalty factor also complicates determining the degrees of freedom to associate with the estimate of a random effect. This results in distributions which are no longer chi squared or F. One source of the complexity is a penalty factor (shrinkage) which is applied to the random effects in the calculation of the likelihood (or restricted likelihood) function the model is optimized to. This complicates the inferences which can be made from mixed models. This is in contrast to OLS parameters, and to some extent GLM parameters, which asymptotically converge to known distributions. I thought you were going to phone me first.Mixed model parameters do not have nice asymptotic distributions to test against. He just went up to London and knocked on the appropriate door. Who would know?Īs it happened, through the myriad and unfathomable chances of fate, he got it exactly right, though he of course would never know that. He decided not to mind the fact that with the extraordinary jumble of rules of thumb, wild approximations and arcane guesswork he was using he would be lucky to hit the right galaxy, he just went ahead and got a result. Still, in the end he worked out a method which would at least produce a result. He didn't even know how long it had been, beyond Ford Prefect's rough guess at the time that it was "a couple of million years" and he simply didn't have the maths. There is no significant interaction effect between the hemp strain and the soil type on the mean plant height.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |