[R-sig-ME] Model average error message
Helen McCallin
helenmcc@llin @ending from hotm@il@com
Mon Jul 30 21:56:27 CEST 2018
Hi Phillip
Thank you for your reply.
I got the following output for the mean code 0.5714286. Would I need to try something further with this?
Many thanks again for your help.
Helen
> On 30 Jul 2018, at 13:38, Phillip Alday <phillip.alday using mpi.nl> wrote:
>
> In a previous message, one of the warnings was '2=3=4'. Assuming that
> there's nothing weird about any internal sorting, that would mean these
> models:
>
> ~ d + p + s + t + (1 | random) + d:t + p:s + p:t + s:t
> ~ d + p + s + t + (1 | random) + d:t + p:s + p:t + s:t + p:s:t
> ~ d + p + s + t + (1 | random) + d:p + p:s + p:t + s:t + p:s:t
>
> They are similar but not identical in formula form: the first one is
> missing the three-way interaction, while the the last two differ in the
> two-way interaction involving d (d:t vs d:p). Are the models rank
> deficient? i.e. are there combinations of factors that don't exist such
> that these model terms get dropped? Try looking at these models and
> seeing if there if a term is missing:
>
> summary(get.models(models,subset=delta<5)$`9168`)
>
> Or maybe see if the effective terms in each model are equivalent:
>
> mod3 <- get.models(models,subset=delta<5)$`9168`
> mod4 <- get.models(models,subset=delta<5)$`9120`
>
> mean(sort(names(fixef(mod3))) == sort(names(fixef(mod4))))
>
> If that last line return 1, then the models have identical fixed
> effects, which combined with their identical random effects, you indeed
> make them identical.
>
> And this is a rather weird error -- I'm also grasping at straws here.
>
> Phillip
More information about the R-sig-mixed-models
mailing list