Problem with binomial-normal model in lmer
I have encountered this issue too (I wanted to fit a
lognormal-Poisson model as in Elston et al 2001, Parasitology
122:563-569), but didn't want to bother Doug Bates (having
bugged him about mcmcsamp so often in the past ...) I too
would be curious to know whether this is something that could
be changed or a deeply rooted computational assumption.
In the meantime, you could consider fitting a quasibinomial
model ...
cheers
Ben Bolker
[trying again -- last one was rejected ... because of signature ? ]
nasi0009 at umn.edu wrote:
I have a question about the possibility of fitting a binomial-normal model with lmer. I explain my problem using notation used in "Linear mixed model implementation in lme4" by Prof. Bates (http://stat.ethz.ch/CRAN/doc/vignettes/lme4/Implementation.pdf). By binomial-normal, I mean a model that another term is added to Equation (29) (on page 28) of the paper, i.e. \eta=X\beta+Zb+\epsilon where \epsilon is N(0,\sigma_e). I thought that by modifying Z, \epsilon can be absorbed into Z. However, when I tried to test this on a simple simulated data set I received an error "Error in mer_finalize(ans, verbose) : q = > n = ". Basically, it seems that the basic assumption in lmer for GLMM models is that Z should be a thin matrix (more rows than columns). Naturally, this data-level normal error term can not be absorbed as another random effect since the total number of random effects exceeds the number of observations. Is there any other way around this problem? Am I doing something nonsense? I appreciate if Prof. Bates or anyone who used lmer for GLMM comments on this. Thanks, Ali
_______________________________________________ R-sig-mixed-models at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models