[R-sig-ME] nAGQ > 1 in lme4::glmer gives unexpected likelihood
ph||||p@@|d@y @end|ng |rom mp|@n|
Sun Apr 26 18:07:16 CEST 2020
On 26/04/2020 11:06, Rolf Turner wrote:
> Can the wise denizens of this list confirm to me the problem is *only*
> the former?
> Be that as it may, is not still true that in general log likelihood is
> well-defined only up to an additive constant?
It's the deviance with the additive constant issue, but this bleeds into
the "lie" we learn in intro stats that the deviane is just -2 log
More information about the R-sig-mixed-models