[R-sig-ME] Fwd: model check for negative binomial model

Thierry Onkelinx th|erry@onke||nx @end|ng |rom |nbo@be
Mon Feb 17 14:18:23 CET 2020


Dear Alessandra,

Since you have both the number hatched and the total clutch size you can
calculate the number of successes and failures. That is sufficient for a
binomial distribution.

glmer(cbind(Hatched, Unhatched) ~ Relocation..Y.N. + SP + (1 | Beach_ID) +
(1 | Week), family = binmial)

A negative binomial or Poisson allow predictions larger than the offset.
Which is nonsense given that the number hatched cannot surpass the total
clutch size.

Best regards,

ir. Thierry Onkelinx
Statisticus / Statistician

Vlaamse Overheid / Government of Flanders
INSTITUUT VOOR NATUUR- EN BOSONDERZOEK / RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR NATURE AND
FOREST
Team Biometrie & Kwaliteitszorg / Team Biometrics & Quality Assurance
thierry.onkelinx using inbo.be
Havenlaan 88 bus 73, 1000 Brussel
www.inbo.be

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
To call in the statistician after the experiment is done may be no more
than asking him to perform a post-mortem examination: he may be able to say
what the experiment died of. ~ Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher
The plural of anecdote is not data. ~ Roger Brinner
The combination of some data and an aching desire for an answer does not
ensure that a reasonable answer can be extracted from a given body of data.
~ John Tukey
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

<https://www.inbo.be>


Op wo 12 feb. 2020 om 18:42 schreef Alessandra Bielli <
bielli.alessandra using gmail.com>:

> Dear Ben
>
> Thanks for your quick response.
>
> Yes, emergence success is usually between 60 and 80% or higher.
> I am not sure how to use a binomial, if my data are counts?
>
> Can you explain why the approximation doesn't work well if success gets
> much above 50%? Does it make sense, then, to have "unhatched" as dependent
> variable, so that I predict mortality (usually below 50%) using a nb with
> offset(log(total clutch)) ?
>
> > summary(m.emerged)
> Generalized linear mixed model fit by maximum likelihood (Laplace
> Approximation) ['glmerMod']
>  Family: Negative Binomial(2.2104)  ( log )
> Formula: Unhatched ~ Relocation..Y.N. + SP + offset(log(Total_Clutch)) +
>    (1 | Beach_ID) + (1 | Week)
>    Data: main
>
>      AIC      BIC   logLik deviance df.resid
>   5439.4   5466.0  -2713.7   5427.4      614
>
> Scaled residuals:
>     Min      1Q  Median      3Q     Max
> -1.4383 -0.7242 -0.2287  0.4866  4.0531
>
> Random effects:
>  Groups   Name        Variance Std.Dev.
>  Week     (Intercept) 0.003092 0.0556
>  Beach_ID (Intercept) 0.025894 0.1609
> Number of obs: 620, groups:  Week, 31; Beach_ID, 8
>
> Fixed effects:
>                   Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
> (Intercept)       -1.38864    0.08227 -16.879  < 2e-16 ***
> Relocation..Y.N.Y  0.32105    0.09152   3.508 0.000452 ***
> SPL                0.22218    0.08793   2.527 0.011508 *
> ---
> Signif. codes:  0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
>
> Correlation of Fixed Effects:
>             (Intr) R..Y.N
> Rlct..Y.N.Y -0.143
> SPL         -0.540 -0.038
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alessandra
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 7:29 PM Ben Bolker <bbolker using gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >   Short answer: if emergence success gets much above 50%, then the
> > approximation you're making (Poisson + offset for binomial, or NB +
> > offset for negative binomial) doesn't work well.  You might try a
> > beta-binomial (with glmmTMB) or a binomial + an observation-level random
> > effect.
> >
> >   (On the other hand, your intercept is -0.3, which corresponds to a
> > baseline emergence of 0.42 - not *very* high (but some beaches and years
> > will be well above that ...)
> >
> >   Beyond that, are there any obvious patterns of mis-fit in the
> > predicted values ... ?
> >
> > On 2020-02-11 8:09 p.m., Alessandra Bielli wrote:
> > > Dear list
> > >
> > > I am fitting a poisson model to estimate the effect of a treatment on
> > > emergence success of hatchlings. To estimate emergence success, I use
> > > number of emerged and an offset(log(total clutch).
> > >
> > > However, overdispersion was detected:
> > >
> > >> overdisp_fun(m.emerged) #overdispersion detected
> > >
> > >       chisq       ratio         rdf           p
> > > 3490.300836    5.684529  614.000000    0.000000
> > >
> > > Therefore, I switched to a negative binomial. I know overdispersion is
> > not
> > > relevant for nb models, but the model plots don't look too good. I also
> > > tried to fit a poisson model with OLRE, but still the  plots don't look
> > > good.
> > > How do I know if my model is good enough, and what can I do to improve
> > it?
> > >
> > >> summary(m.emerged)
> > > Generalized linear mixed model fit by maximum likelihood (Laplace
> > > Approximation) ['glmerMod']
> > >  Family: Negative Binomial(7.604)  ( log )
> > > Formula: Hatched ~ Relocation..Y.N. + SP + offset(log(Total_Clutch)) +
> (1
> > > |Beach_ID) + (1 | Year)
> > >    Data: main
> > >
> > >      AIC      BIC   logLik deviance df.resid
> > >   6015.6   6042.2  -3001.8   6003.6      614
> > >
> > > Scaled residuals:
> > >     Min      1Q  Median      3Q     Max
> > > -2.6427 -0.3790  0.1790  0.5242  1.6583
> > >
> > > Random effects:
> > >  Groups   Name        Variance Std.Dev.
> > >  Beach_ID (Intercept) 0.004438 0.06662
> > >  Year     (Intercept) 0.001640 0.04050
> > > Number of obs: 620, groups:  Beach_ID, 8; Year, 5
> > >
> > > Fixed effects:
> > >                   Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
> > > (Intercept)       -0.29915    0.04055  -7.377 1.62e-13 ***
> > > Relocation..Y.N.Y -0.16402    0.05052  -3.247  0.00117 **
> > > SPL               -0.08311    0.04365  -1.904  0.05689 .
> > > ---
> > > Signif. codes:  0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
> > >
> > > Correlation of Fixed Effects:
> > >             (Intr) R..Y.N
> > > Rlct..Y.N.Y -0.114
> > > SPL         -0.497 -0.054
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks for your help,
> > >
> > > Alessandra
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > R-sig-mixed-models using r-project.org mailing list
> > > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > R-sig-mixed-models using r-project.org mailing list
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models
> >
> _______________________________________________
> R-sig-mixed-models using r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models
>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]



More information about the R-sig-mixed-models mailing list