Negative Binomial in glmmadmb
Thanks so much for the response. I know this is probably very simple but how do I denote the family as negative binomial using glmmTMB? I've dug through text regarding this package and have had trouble coming up with anything that works. Chad
From: R-sig-mixed-models <r-sig-mixed-models-bounces at r-project.org> on behalf of Ben Bolker <bbolker at gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 7:45 PM
To: r-sig-mixed-models at r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R-sig-ME] Negative Binomial in glmmadmb
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 7:45 PM
To: r-sig-mixed-models at r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R-sig-ME] Negative Binomial in glmmadmb
Chad Newbolt <newboch at ...> writes: > [snip] > Since I have evidence for overdispersion, I'm using negative > binomial distribution as opposed to Poisson. My two questions are: > 1) When I fit using the following global zero inflation model I > receive the following error: > fit1=glmmadmb(Fawn~Age+I(Age^2)+BodySize+SSCM+AvgAge+Age*AvgAge+ I(Age^2)*AvgAge+BodySize*AvgAge+SSCM*AvgAge+(1|Sire), data=datum,family="nbinom",zeroInflation = TRUE) I think you can shorten this a bit to (Age+I(Age^2)+BodySize+SSCM)*AvgAge + (1|Sire) > Parameters were estimated, but standard errors were not: the most > likely problem is that the curvature at MLE was zero or negative > Error in glmmadmb(Fawn ~ Age + I(Age^2) + BodySize + SSCM + AvgAge + > Age * : The function maximizer failed (couldn't find parameter file) > Troubleshooting steps include (1) run with 'save.dir' set and > inspect output files; (2) change run parameters: see > '?admbControl';(3) re-run with debug=TRUE for more information on > failure mode In addition: Warning message: running command > 'C:\windows\system32\cmd.exe /c glmmadmb -maxfn 500 -maxph 5 -noinit > -shess' had status 1 > However, when I change to zeroInflation = FALSE, I receive no > warnings and everything seems to go as should. > Does this simply mean that my data is not zero inflated, hence the > zero inflated model will not run, or is this something I should be > concerned about and investigate the cause further? When I debug I > see the following warning....Warning -- Hessian does not appear to > be positive definite Hessian does not appear to be positive > definite. > 2) When fitting more simple versions(predictors removed) I receive > the same error as above when using the family=nbinom; however these > errors disappear when using family=nbinom1. Is this indicative of > an underlying problem or am I OK to use the ouput from the later > family where variance = ??. Thanks, Chad [[alternative HTML version > deleted]] Short answer: you should be a little concerned, and you should not assume that your data are not zero-inflated. These are not indications about what your model is actually finding, just indications that ADMB ran into *some* kind of trouble. Unfortunately, there is no really simple guide to trouble-shooting these kinds of problems. Some general suggestions: * try out the glmmTMB package - it's newer/experimental, but often more stable * the ?admbControl man page suggests trying shess=FALSE and noinit=FALSE * it may not help in this case, but centering continuous predictors is always worth a shot * similarly, poly(Age,2) is a little more stable than (Age+I(Age^2)) * inspect your data graphically to see whether there are outliers or other odd patterns that might be messing up the fit _______________________________________________ R-sig-mixed-models at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models