<br>(1) In short, I can find essentially no difference in the results of the samm and lmer models (the most complex one that both functions could handle):<br><br>lmer: math~ gr + sx + eth + cltype + (1+yrs|id) + (1|sch)<br>
samm: math ~ gr + sx + eth + cltype, random=~ us(link(~1+yrs)):id + sch<br><br>After several hours searching through the return values of the two functions (slots, S3 methods, S4 methods, extractors and all that) and identifying unique approaches (lmer uses polynomial contrasts for ordered factors and samm uses treatment contrasts; missing values in the data are handled slightly differently in the way the random effects return values are presented), I find the two functions have nearly identical variance components and essentially identical fixed effects and random effects. An R transcript is attached for reference.
<br><br>(2) Yes, SAMM is proprietary. It is available on Windows and Linux, S-Plus and R. The developer has told me that version 2 is very near completion. If you ever want to try it out, there is a 30-day free trial before it stops working.
<br><br>I use lme4 because it is open-source and has a good community of users, published examples, etc. I use samm to analyze data from plant breeding experiments (current literature methods use large data sets, crossed random effects, heteroskedasticity, spatial correlation, etc.). SAMM also has convenient reporting of linear predictions of BLUEs/BLUPs (Welham , Cullis, Gogel, Gilmour, & Thompson 2004, Stroup & Mulitze 1991) for decision-making. I also use both because fitting the same model using two different software packages (when the software capabilities allow for it) really helps me think carefully and hard about what I'm asking the software to do, what it actually does, and what the results actually mean.
<br><br>Thanks for the challenging question...I learned more because of it.<br><br><br>Kevin <br><br>(thread edited below for brevity)<br><br>Doug Bates wrote:<br><div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
I'm not sure if I have access to SAMM to check the timings. Is SAMM<br>proprietary? My recollection is that it is proprietary and that it is<br>Windows-only. Either one of those characteristics is the kiss of<br>death for my wanting to use it.
<br><br>Are you sure that SAMM is fitting a model with partially-crossed<br>random effects? If you are only considering students and schools as<br>grouping factors for the random effects there will be little<br>difference between assuming nested random effects and correcting for
<br>the partial crossing. This is because there are very few students in<br>this study who attend more than one school. If you considered<br>teachers as well as students and schools as grouping factors then you<br>could more easily discern the difference in model fits taking into
<br>account the crossing or assuming that each student:teacher:school<br>combination is unique.<br></blockquote></div><br>