[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       r-sig-mixed-models
Subject:    Re: [R-sig-ME] Likelihood function of lme4
From:       Yashree Mehta <yashree19 () gmail ! com>
Date:       2021-04-20 16:23:41
Message-ID: CAOE=hqJQivznqCwPE+WnqQvbu+sM1-U799xyg1hX9zZZEMcZhg () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

OK. I will make sure.

On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 6:02 PM Ben Bolker <bbolker@gmail.com> wrote:

>    OK.  You should make sure to check that lme4 and frontier are
> computing *commensurate* log-likelihoods (e.g. that the normalization
> constants are consistently included in both packages); if possible (it
> isn't always), it's good to try to fit *identical* models in both
> package to make sure they give the same log-likelihoods. (You can't fit
> an lmer model without a random effect, but you can re-evaluate its
> likelihood with the RE variances set to zero.)
>
> On 4/20/21 11:52 AM, Yashree Mehta wrote:
> > Yes, I am trying to run the Vuong test.
> >
> > The other model with which I am comparing the lme4 model belongs to the
> > "frontier" class of models. I did use nonnest2 but got the
> following error:
> > Error in UseMethod("llcont") :
> >    no applicable method for 'llcont' applied to an object of class
> > "frontier"
> >
> > So I decided to calculate the Vuong statistic by constructing it using
> > observation-level loglikelihoods.
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Yashree
>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

_______________________________________________
R-sig-mixed-models@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]