[R] negetative AIC values: How to compare models with negative AIC's
Douglas Bates
bates at stat.wisc.edu
Fri Apr 15 17:17:50 CEST 2005
Jan Verbesselt wrote:
> Dear,
>
> When fitting the following model
> knots <- 5
> lrm.NDWI <- lrm(m.arson ~ rcs(NDWI,knots)
>
> I obtain the following result:
>
> Logistic Regression Model
>
> lrm(formula = m.arson ~ rcs(NDWI, knots))
>
>
> Frequencies of Responses
> 0 1
> 666 35
>
> Obs Max Deriv Model L.R. d.f. P C Dxy
> Gamma Tau-a R2 Brier
> 701 5e-07 34.49 4 0 0.777 0.553
> 0.563 0.053 0.147 0.045
>
> Coef S.E. Wald Z P
> Intercept -4.627 3.188 -1.45 0.1467
> NDWI 5.333 20.724 0.26 0.7969
> NDWI' 6.832 74.201 0.09 0.9266
> NDWI'' 10.469 183.915 0.06 0.9546
> NDWI''' -190.566 254.590 -0.75 0.4541
>
> When analysing the glm fit of the same model
>
> Call: glm(formula = m.arson ~ rcs(NDWI, knots), x = T, y = T)
>
> Coefficients:
> (Intercept) rcs(NDWI, knots)NDWI rcs(NDWI, knots)NDWI'
> rcs(NDWI, knots)NDWI'' rcs(NDWI, knots)NDWI'''
> 0.02067 0.08441 -0.54307
> 3.99550 -17.38573
>
> Degrees of Freedom: 700 Total (i.e. Null); 696 Residual
> Null Deviance: 33.25
> Residual Deviance: 31.76 AIC: -167.7
>
> A negative AIC occurs!
>
> How can the negative AIC from different models be compared with each other?
> Is this result logical? Is the lowest AIC still correct?
I'm not sure about this particular example but in general there is no
problem with a negative AIC or a negative deviance just as there is no
problem with a positive log-likelihood. It is a common misconception
that the log-likelihood must be negative. If the likelihood is derived
from a probability density it can quite reasonably exceed 1 which means
that log-likelihood is positive, hence the deviance and the AIC are
negative.
If you believe that comparing AICs is a good way to choose a model then
it would still be the case that the (algebraically) lower AIC is preferred.
More information about the R-help
mailing list