The Mixed Models Controversy Revisited

Similar documents
Much ado about nothing: the mixed models controversy revisited

17 Nested and Higher Order Designs

Dr. Shalabh Department of Mathematics and Statistics Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur

The Multiple Classical Linear Regression Model (CLRM): Specification and Assumptions. 1. Introduction

1. Inference on Regression Parameters a. Finding Mean, s.d and covariance amongst estimates. 2. Confidence Intervals and Working Hotelling Bands

Measure for measure: exact F tests and the mixed models controversy

ANOVA. The Observations y ij

Estimation: Part 2. Chapter GREG estimation

4 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) 5 ANOVA. 5.1 Introduction. 5.2 Fixed Effects ANOVA

Introduction to Dummy Variable Regressors. 1. An Example of Dummy Variable Regressors

Lecture 3 Stat102, Spring 2007

Economics 130. Lecture 4 Simple Linear Regression Continued

Department of Statistics University of Toronto STA305H1S / 1004 HS Design and Analysis of Experiments Term Test - Winter Solution

Chapter 5 Multilevel Models

Dr. Shalabh Department of Mathematics and Statistics Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur

Econ107 Applied Econometrics Topic 3: Classical Model (Studenmund, Chapter 4)

Two-factor model. Statistical Models. Least Squares estimation in LM two-factor model. Rats

MD. LUTFOR RAHMAN 1 AND KALIPADA SEN 2 Abstract

Discussion of Extensions of the Gauss-Markov Theorem to the Case of Stochastic Regression Coefficients Ed Stanek

Topic 23 - Randomized Complete Block Designs (RCBD)

STAT 3008 Applied Regression Analysis

Durban Watson for Testing the Lack-of-Fit of Polynomial Regression Models without Replications

Lecture 6: Introduction to Linear Regression

Parametric fractional imputation for missing data analysis. Jae Kwang Kim Survey Working Group Seminar March 29, 2010

BOOTSTRAP METHOD FOR TESTING OF EQUALITY OF SEVERAL MEANS. M. Krishna Reddy, B. Naveen Kumar and Y. Ramu

Random Partitions of Samples

Computation of Higher Order Moments from Two Multinomial Overdispersion Likelihood Models

Composite Hypotheses testing

MATH 281A: Homework #6

Chapter 13: Multiple Regression

PROBABILITY AND STATISTICS Vol. III - Analysis of Variance and Analysis of Covariance - V. Nollau ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE AND ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE

Goodness of fit and Wilks theorem

Statistics for Managers Using Microsoft Excel/SPSS Chapter 13 The Simple Linear Regression Model and Correlation

Statistics II Final Exam 26/6/18

Interval Estimation in the Classical Normal Linear Regression Model. 1. Introduction

Dr. Shalabh Department of Mathematics and Statistics Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur

Lecture 9: Linear regression: centering, hypothesis testing, multiple covariates, and confounding

Lecture 9: Linear regression: centering, hypothesis testing, multiple covariates, and confounding

Chapter 11: Simple Linear Regression and Correlation

e i is a random error

The Power of Proc Nlmixed

x = , so that calculated

MATH 829: Introduction to Data Mining and Analysis The EM algorithm (part 2)

Population Design in Nonlinear Mixed Effects Multiple Response Models: extension of PFIM and evaluation by simulation with NONMEM and MONOLIX

2016 Wiley. Study Session 2: Ethical and Professional Standards Application

Chapter 5: Hypothesis Tests, Confidence Intervals & Gauss-Markov Result

Comments on Detecting Outliers in Gamma Distribution by M. Jabbari Nooghabi et al. (2010)

Global Sensitivity. Tuesday 20 th February, 2018

Standardized Simple Mediation Model: A Numerical Example

Introduction to Regression

Chapter 15 - Multiple Regression

BIO Lab 2: TWO-LEVEL NORMAL MODELS with school children popularity data

BETWEEN-PARTICIPANTS EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS

Econ Statistical Properties of the OLS estimator. Sanjaya DeSilva

Marginal Effects in Probit Models: Interpretation and Testing. 1. Interpreting Probit Coefficients

Chapter 2 - The Simple Linear Regression Model S =0. e i is a random error. S β2 β. This is a minimization problem. Solution is a calculus exercise.

A Bound for the Relative Bias of the Design Effect

Polynomial Regression Models

Biostatistics 360 F&t Tests and Intervals in Regression 1

A Note on Test of Homogeneity Against Umbrella Scale Alternative Based on U-Statistics

Now we relax this assumption and allow that the error variance depends on the independent variables, i.e., heteroskedasticity

Number of cases Number of factors Number of covariates Number of levels of factor i. Value of the dependent variable for case k

LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS. MODULE IX Lecture Multicollinearity

Dr. Shalabh Department of Mathematics and Statistics Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur

P R. Lecture 4. Theory and Applications of Pattern Recognition. Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering /

An (almost) unbiased estimator for the S-Gini index

USE OF DOUBLE SAMPLING SCHEME IN ESTIMATING THE MEAN OF STRATIFIED POPULATION UNDER NON-RESPONSE

DECADAL DECLINE ( )OF LOGGERHEAD SHRIKES ON CHRISTMAS BIRD COUNTS IN ALABAMA, MISSISSIPPI, AND TENNESSEE

Lecture 2: Prelude to the big shrink

where I = (n x n) diagonal identity matrix with diagonal elements = 1 and off-diagonal elements = 0; and σ 2 e = variance of (Y X).

j) = 1 (note sigma notation) ii. Continuous random variable (e.g. Normal distribution) 1. density function: f ( x) 0 and f ( x) dx = 1

Lecture 16 Statistical Analysis in Biomaterials Research (Part II)

How its computed. y outcome data λ parameters hyperparameters. where P denotes the Laplace approximation. k i k k. Andrew B Lawson 2013

ANSWERS. Problem 1. and the moment generating function (mgf) by. defined for any real t. Use this to show that E( U) var( U)

Lecture 4 Hypothesis Testing

Digital Modems. Lecture 2

Chapter 8 Indicator Variables

Joint Statistical Meetings - Biopharmaceutical Section

An R implementation of bootstrap procedures for mixed models

Here is the rationale: If X and y have a strong positive relationship to one another, then ( x x) will tend to be positive when ( y y)

Chapter 11: I = 2 samples independent samples paired samples Chapter 12: I 3 samples of equal size J one-way layout two-way layout

ANOMALIES OF THE MAGNITUDE OF THE BIAS OF THE MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATOR OF THE REGRESSION SLOPE

Chapter 12 Analysis of Covariance

Analysis of Variance and Design of Experiments-II

First Year Examination Department of Statistics, University of Florida

Multivariate Ratio Estimator of the Population Total under Stratified Random Sampling

[The following data appear in Wooldridge Q2.3.] The table below contains the ACT score and college GPA for eight college students.

PHYS 705: Classical Mechanics. Calculus of Variations II

CIS526: Machine Learning Lecture 3 (Sept 16, 2003) Linear Regression. Preparation help: Xiaoying Huang. x 1 θ 1 output... θ M x M

+ E 1,1.k + E 2,1.k Again, we need a constraint because our model is over-parameterized. We add the constraint that

Introduction to Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Part 1

Unbalanced Nested ANOVA - Sokal & Rohlf Example

Bias-correction under a semi-parametric model for small area estimation

Multiple Choice. Choose the one that best completes the statement or answers the question.

Primer on High-Order Moment Estimators

# c i. INFERENCE FOR CONTRASTS (Chapter 4) It's unbiased: Recall: A contrast is a linear combination of effects with coefficients summing to zero:

Statistics Spring MIT Department of Nuclear Engineering

Reduced slides. Introduction to Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Part 1. Single factor

Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Binary Dependent Variables Models: Probit and Logit. 1. General Formulation of Binary Dependent Variables Models

Lossy Compression. Compromise accuracy of reconstruction for increased compression.

Transcription:

The Mxed Models Controversy Revsted Vvana eatrz Lencna Departamento de Metodología e Investgacón, FM Unversdad Naconal de Tucumán Julo da Motta Snger Departamento de Estatístca, IME Unversdade de São Paulo Edward J. Stanek III Department of ostatstcs and Epdemology, SPH Unversty of Massachusetts at Amherst www.unx.ot.umass.edu/~cluster

ANOVA WITH TWO FIXED FACTORS Example I: Evaluate changes n the average bond strength values of metal parts as a functon of manufacturng technque and orgn of raw materal Populaton averages Manufact urng technque Orgn of raw materal 3 4 A 3 4 A 3 4 A 3 3 3 33 34 : average bond strength values of metal parts manufactured accordng to technque A wth raw materal, =,, 3, =,, 3, 4. : average bond strength values of metal parts manufactured accordng to technque A, =,, 3;. 4 = 4 = : smlar defnton for orgn of raw materal. : average bond strength values of metal parts ; 4 3 3 4 = = = 4 = 3 = = =

3 Defnton of factor effects Man effect of level of factor A α = α = α Man effect of level of factor β = β = β Interacton between level of factor A and level of factor γ + γ = γ or equvalently, γ = { + ) + ( )} = ( Interacton patterns

4 Model Yk = + ek =,,3; =,,3,4; k =,..., r constants { }.. d. N ( 0, ) e k or equvalently, Y = + α + β + γ + e =,,3; =,...,4; k =,..., r k k, α, β e γ constants subect to α β = γ = γ { }.. d. N ( 0, ) e k = No nteracton between factors A and, γ γ When there s no nteracton or when the nteracton s not essental, we may consder the hypotheses of no man effects No factor A man effects, α α No factor man effects, β 0 β =

5 ANOVA Table (=,..., I; =,..., J e k=,..., r) Source Sum of Squares d.f.. EMS Factor A SSA = Jr ( y y ) I- + Jrφ ( α) Factor SS = Ir ( y y ) J- + Irφ ( β ) SS = r A* A Error SS y ( y y y + y ) (I-)(J-) + rφ ( γ ) E = k y ) k ( IJ(r-) φ ( α) = α, φ ( β ) = β, φ ( γ ) = γ I J ( J )( I )

6 ANOVA WITH ONE FIXED AND ONE RANDOM FACTOR Example II: Evaluate changes n the average bond strength values of metal parts as a functon of manufacturng technque and machne Averages Manufact urng technque A Machne w w w 3 w 4 m ( w ) m( w ) m3( w 3) m4( w 4) A 3 m ( w ) m( w ) m3( w 3) m4( w 4) A 3 m ( w ) m3( w ) m33( w 3) m34( w 4) OS: The machnes consttute a smple random sample of a populaton, Ω. Then s a random vector. ( ( ), ( ), ( )) m w m w m w 3 Mxed model Fxed factor: A Random factor: Two models, defned n analogy to the fxed factor model have been proposed n the lterature.

7 UNCONSTRAINED PARAMETER MODEL (UP) k ( ) E, Y = + α + + α + ( 0, ), ( α) ~ N( 0, α ) e E ~ N ( 0, ) ~ N ndependent, =,..., a; =,..., b e k =,..., r. k k, CONSTRAINED PARAMETER MODEL (CP) D k ( D) E, Y = η + τ + D + τ + ( a ) ( 0, ), ( τd) ~ N 0, τ e E ~ N ( 0, ) ~ N D D k a ( ) ( ) τ, τd, ; Cov ( τd),( τd) = τ D / a otherwse, ndependent; =,..., a; =,..., b e k =,..., r. k, ANOVA Table (=,..., a; =,..., b e k=,..., r) Source Sum of Squares EMS (UP) EMS (CP) Factor A SS + rα + brφ ( α ) + r + φ τd br ( τ ) A Factor SS α + + r ar + ar D A* SS A + r α + r τd Error SS E

8 Tests for no effects Effect UP CP Hypothess Test statstc Hypothess Test statstc Factor A φ ( α ) MSS A MSS φ () τ A MSS A MSS E Factor MSS MSSA D MSS MSSE Interacton α MSS A MSS E τd MSS A MSS E Controversy: test for no factor man effects? Equvalence between parameters One may show that = D D = a + a Dfferent models apparently generate dfferent hypotheses. Problem Whch one should we test? How should we defne man effects and nteracton? Some authors suggest that the choce must be made by the researcher Suggeston: nterpret the parameters under both models τ D α

PARAMETER INTERPRETATION AND DEFINITION OF EFFECTS IN MIXED MODELS 9 Fnte number of levels of factor Ω : # Ω = b fnte Populaton of levels of factor, ( ) * Fxed effects model for the populaton of levels of factor sk s sk sk { }..d ( 0, ) Y = + e e N * =,..., a, s=,..., b e k=,..., r No factor man effects s, s Mxed model after samplng levels of factor ) Y M E a b b k r * k = + k, =,...,, =,..., ( < ) e =,..., where b * * M = U, E = U e U s s k s sk s= s= s b f th level of factor s level s 0 otherwse = OS: Randomness s clearly nduced by samplng

0 One may show that ( M ) 0 s s Ω Var M = Ths mples that no factor man effects s equvalent to ( M M ) Var For fnte number of levels of factor the test s complcated Infnte number of levels of factor Populaton of levels of factor : Ωwth #( Ω ) = Model: Yk = + α + M + Ek, =,, a, =,, b, k =,, r M N(0, p+ q), Cov( M, M ) = q ' Ek N(0, ), ndependent and ndependent of M Var( M,, M ) = pi+ qj Scheff'e (959) a UP model: M = + α N N (0, ), α (0, α), ndep p=, q= α CP model: M = D + τ D D N D N a a (0, D), τ {0,( /( )) τ D}, ndep Cov D D a ( τ, τ ' ) = τd/ q= / a, p= / a D τd τd

Random varables: M : Ω Θ R ( ωθ, ) M ( ω) E k : Ω Θ R ( ωθ, ) E ( ωθ, ) k Factor A man effects: ( ) ( ) E Y (,) E Y (,) = ( + α ) = α Ω Θ Ω Θ No factor A man effects α Factor man effects: No factor ( ω ) ( ) EΘ Y (,) E E Y (,) Ω Θ = b( ω) man effects b ω ω Var( b) ( ), Ω Var( M )

Expresson n terms of UP and CP models V V ( M ) UP ( M ) = + a α = a CP D Concluson: The hypothess of nterest s D under the CP model or equvalently, + a α under the UP model COPMPUTATIONAL ASPECTS Many authors suggest the UP model: Analyss s easly performed n terms of lkelhoods Analyss s easly mplemented for unbalanced data Statstcal software avalable (SAS proc MIXED) Ths s not so! Lkelhood rato tests under non-standard condtons (parameters le on the border of parametrc space) Exact tests (based on ANOVA technques) are avalable but not ncluded n most statstcal software packages

3 REFERENCES Chrstensen, R. (996) Exact tests for varance components. ometrcs, 5, 309-34. Hnkelmann, K. (000). Resolvng the Mxed Models Controversy, Comments. The Amercan Statstcan, 54, 8. Hockng, R.R. (973). A Dscusson of the Two-Way Mxed Model. The Amercan Statstcan, 7, 48-5. McLean, R.A., Sanders, W.L. and Stroup, W.W. (99). A Unfed Approach to Mxed Lnear Models. The Amercan Statstcan, 45, 54-59. Neter, J., Wasserman, W., Kutner, M.H. and Nachtshem, C.J. (996). Appled Lnear Statstcal Models (4 rd ed.). Homewood, Ill: Irwn. Öfversten, N. (993). Exact tests for varance components n unbalanced mxed lnear models. ometrcs, 49, 45-57. Samuels, M.L., Casella, G. and McCabe, G.P. (99). Interpretng locks and Random Factors. Journal of the Amercan Statstcal Assocaton, 86, 798-8. Scheffé, H. (959). The Analyss of Varance. New York: Wley. Searle, S.R. (97). Lnear Models. New York: Wley. Stram, D.O. and Lee, J.W. (994). Varance components tetstng n the longtudnal mxed effects model. ometrcs, 50, 7-77. Voss, D.T. (999). Resolvng the Mxed Models Controversy. The Amercan Statstcan, 5, 35-356. Wolfnger, R. and Stroup, W.W. (000). Resolvng the Mxed Models Controversy, Comments. The Amercan Statstcan, 54, 8.