[R-sig-eco] AIC / BIC vs P-Values in lmer

Crowe, Andrew a.crowe at lancaster.ac.uk
Thu Aug 5 15:23:04 CEST 2010


Chris/Ben
 
The lack of effect of the REML parameter is simply explained by the fact you are fitting a binomial model.  This causes the lmer call to default to a glmer call in which the REML parameter is ignored.  I also note that you are specifying order/family in the random term, which I assume are the taxanomic definitions of family and order.  As family is completey nested in order so that order:family is as unique as family, no additional variance is explained by order over family so I believe that you should just be able to specify (1|family) for your random intercept.
 
Regards
 
Andrew
 
Dr Andrew Crowe
 
Lancaster Environment Centre
Lancaster University
Lancaster    LA1 4YQ
UK

________________________________

From: r-sig-ecology-bounces at r-project.org on behalf of Chris Mcowen
Sent: Thu 05/08/2010 2:04 PM
To: Ben Bolker
Cc: r-sig-ecology at r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R-sig-eco] AIC / BIC vs P-Values in lmer



I have just tried it with REML=FALSE and once again there is no difference in the AIC/BIC values between the two models? I have given two examples this time but have tried it with 10 models with no difference.

Thanks,
Chris


1

MODEL WITH REML=FALSE

> model01 <- lmer(threatornot~1+(1|order/family) + seasonality + pollendispersal +  breedingsystem*fruit + habit + lifeform +  woodyness, family=binomial,REML=FALSE )


Generalized linear mixed model fit by the Laplace approximation
Formula: threatornot ~ 1 + (1 | order/family) + seasonality + pollendispersal +      breedingsystem * fruit + habit + lifeform + woodyness
  AIC  BIC logLik deviance
 1399 1479 -683.6     1367
Random effects:
 Groups       Name        Variance Std.Dev.
 family:order (Intercept) 0.27526  0.52466
 order        (Intercept) 0.00000  0.00000
Number of obs: 1116, groups: family:order, 43; order, 9

Fixed effects:
                        Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)  
(Intercept)             0.384574   0.734960   0.523  0.60079  
seasonality2           -1.127996   0.353013  -3.195  0.00140 **
pollendispersal2        0.693255   0.314600   2.204  0.02755 *
breedingsystem2         0.761067   0.493404   1.542  0.12296  
breedingsystem3         1.226269   0.557236   2.201  0.02776 *
fruit2                  1.047648   0.616723   1.699  0.08937 .
habit2                 -1.146334   0.551682  -2.078  0.03772 *
habit3                 -0.731207   0.872805  -0.838  0.40216  
habit4                 -0.190900   0.551427  -0.346  0.72920  
lifeform2              -0.295342   0.182667  -1.617  0.10592  
lifeform3              -0.376204   0.501825  -0.750  0.45345  
woodyness2              0.006274   0.390241   0.016  0.98717  
breedingsystem2:fruit2 -1.273811   0.651011  -1.957  0.05039 .
breedingsystem3:fruit2 -1.633424   0.744563  -2.194  0.02825 *


MODEL WITHOUT REML=FALSE

model126 <- lmer(threatornot~1+(1|order/family) + seasonality + pollendispersal +  breedingsystem*fruit + habit + lifeform +  woodyness, family=binomial)

Generalized linear mixed model fit by the Laplace approximation
Formula: threatornot ~ 1 + (1 | order/family) + seasonality + pollendispersal +      breedingsystem * fruit + habit + lifeform + woodyness
  AIC  BIC logLik deviance
 1399 1479 -683.6     1367
Random effects:
 Groups       Name        Variance Std.Dev.
 family:order (Intercept) 0.27526  0.52466
 order        (Intercept) 0.00000  0.00000
Number of obs: 1116, groups: family:order, 43; order, 9

Fixed effects:
                        Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)  
(Intercept)             0.384574   0.734960   0.523  0.60079  
seasonality2           -1.127996   0.353013  -3.195  0.00140 **
pollendispersal2        0.693255   0.314600   2.204  0.02755 *
breedingsystem2         0.761067   0.493404   1.542  0.12296  
breedingsystem3         1.226269   0.557236   2.201  0.02776 *
fruit2                  1.047648   0.616723   1.699  0.08937 .
habit2                 -1.146334   0.551682  -2.078  0.03772 *
habit3                 -0.731207   0.872805  -0.838  0.40216  
habit4                 -0.190900   0.551427  -0.346  0.72920  
lifeform2              -0.295342   0.182667  -1.617  0.10592  
lifeform3              -0.376204   0.501825  -0.750  0.45345  
woodyness2              0.006274   0.390241   0.016  0.98717  
breedingsystem2:fruit2 -1.273811   0.651011  -1.957  0.05039 .
breedingsystem3:fruit2 -1.633424   0.744563  -2.194  0.02825 *

2

MODEL WITH REML=FALSE
> model02 <- lmer(threatornot~1+(1|order/family) + seasonality + woodyness, family=binomial,REML=FALSE )

Generalized linear mixed model fit by the Laplace approximation
Formula: threatornot ~ 1 + (1 | order/family) + seasonality + woodyness
  AIC  BIC logLik deviance
 1395 1420 -692.6     1385
Random effects:
 Groups       Name        Variance Std.Dev.
 family:order (Intercept) 0.49348  0.70248
 order        (Intercept) 0.00000  0.00000
Number of obs: 1116, groups: family:order, 43; order, 9

Fixed effects:
             Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)   
(Intercept)    0.6034     0.4227   1.427  0.15346   
seasonality2  -1.1421     0.3453  -3.308  0.00094 ***
woodyness2     0.5113     0.2559   1.998  0.04572 * 

MODEL WITHOUT REML=FALSE
model03 <- lmer(threatornot~1+(1|order/family) + seasonality + woodyness, family=binomial)
Generalized linear mixed model fit by the Laplace approximation
Formula: threatornot ~ 1 + (1 | order/family) + seasonality + woodyness
  AIC  BIC logLik deviance
 1395 1420 -692.6     1385
Random effects:
 Groups       Name        Variance Std.Dev.
 family:order (Intercept) 0.49348  0.70248
 order        (Intercept) 0.00000  0.00000
Number of obs: 1116, groups: family:order, 43; order, 9

Fixed effects:
             Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)   
(Intercept)    0.6034     0.4227   1.427  0.15346   
seasonality2  -1.1421     0.3453  -3.308  0.00094 ***
woodyness2     0.5113     0.2559   1.998  0.04572 * 


On 5 Aug 2010, at 13:51, Ben Bolker wrote:

Chris Mcowen <chrismcowen at ...> writes:

>
> Hi Philip,
>
> Thanks very much for this, i was completely unaware. I  have read various
papers using lmer to calculate the
> AIC statistic and none have mentioned this?
>
> I have just run through a random section of my models with this correction,
however the AIC / BIC values are
> the same with the REML=F in and out?
>
> Chris

 Try REML=FALSE instead ... ?  (You may have 'F' set to a value
in your workspace.)  Otherwise I would find it very odd that the
results are identical.

_______________________________________________
R-sig-ecology mailing list
R-sig-ecology at r-project.org
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-ecology


        [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

_______________________________________________
R-sig-ecology mailing list
R-sig-ecology at r-project.org
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-ecology



More information about the R-sig-ecology mailing list