<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Interpreting the Estimated G Matrix in Proc Mixed in Statistical Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/801653#M39403</link>
    <description>I think I figured it out. Does it mean "Based on the off-diagonals, we estimate a covariance of 0.9730 between two measurements on the same Flask, regardless of time lapsed?"</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2022 12:55:24 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Lyson</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2022-03-11T12:55:24Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Interpreting the Estimated G Matrix in Proc Mixed</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/801652#M39402</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have run this code in Proc Mixed for repeated measurements on subjects=Flask:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;proc mixed data=FRF method=reml cl ic covtest;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;class CCI4 CHCI3  Time Flask ;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;model Leakage=CCI4  Time CCI4*Time ;&lt;BR /&gt;random CHCI3  CCI4*CHCI3 CHCI3*Time CCI4*CHCI3*Time /s;&lt;BR /&gt;repeated   / subject=Flask(CCI4*CHCI3)  type=arh(1) r;&lt;BR /&gt;lsmeans CCI4 / pdiff cl adjust=tukey;&lt;BR /&gt;run;&lt;/PRE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;And part of the output shows the G Matrix below. How do we interpret the ARH(1) subject&amp;nbsp; effect Flask(CCI4*CHCHI3) and its&amp;nbsp; Estimate 0.9730?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Lyson_0-1647002605685.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://communities.sas.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/69400i737251D89817A897/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Lyson_0-1647002605685.png" alt="Lyson_0-1647002605685.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2022 12:43:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/801652#M39402</guid>
      <dc:creator>Lyson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-11T12:43:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Interpreting the Estimated G Matrix in Proc Mixed</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/801653#M39403</link>
      <description>I think I figured it out. Does it mean "Based on the off-diagonals, we estimate a covariance of 0.9730 between two measurements on the same Flask, regardless of time lapsed?"</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2022 12:55:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/801653#M39403</guid>
      <dc:creator>Lyson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-11T12:55:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Interpreting the Estimated G Matrix in Proc Mixed</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/801663#M39404</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;0.9730 in the Covariance Parameter Estimates table is not an element in the G matrix. It is a parameter in the R matrix. It is the correlation in the residuals between two adjacent observations. See the documentation below for more information on the ARH(1) structure. The estimated value for rho is 0.9730.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://go.documentation.sas.com/doc/en/pgmsascdc/v_023/statug/statug_mixed_syntax14.htm#statug.mixed.repeatedstmt_type" target="_blank"&gt;https://go.documentation.sas.com/doc/en/pgmsascdc/v_023/statug/statug_mixed_syntax14.htm#statug.mixed.repeatedstmt_type&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Also, your G matrix is not positive definite. You might want to take out some of the random effects in your RANDOM statement.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Jill&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2022 13:57:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/801663#M39404</guid>
      <dc:creator>jiltao</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-11T13:57:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Interpreting the Estimated G Matrix in Proc Mixed</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/801678#M39407</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://communities.sas.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/60873"&gt;@jiltao&lt;/a&gt; Thank you for the material. You are very correct. Does the non-positive definite matrix impact negatively on the covariance parameters estimated by the model, or it is just a warning that something in not right? I relised that the more I include some random parameters the more i get problems with convergence as well.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2022 15:17:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/801678#M39407</guid>
      <dc:creator>Lyson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-11T15:17:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Interpreting the Estimated G Matrix in Proc Mixed</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/801699#M39408</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;G matrix not positive definite might not be devastating, but it is always a good idea to take care of this so you have a clean convergence. If you take out the random effects that have 0 estimated variance, this message is likely going away. The estimates for other effects might remain the same.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2022 16:26:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/801699#M39408</guid>
      <dc:creator>jiltao</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-11T16:26:02Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Interpreting the Estimated G Matrix in Proc Mixed</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/801951#M39424</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://communities.sas.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/60873"&gt;@jiltao&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp; - removing the random effects when there is a non-positive G matrix seems to me to be a problem for randomized complete block designs, where the block estimate is zero.&amp;nbsp; Removal shifts the denominator degrees of freedom from containment to residual, so the analysis no longer reflects the blocking in the design.&amp;nbsp; Is the answer then to use a ddf= option to set the denominator degrees of freedom to what would be expected for the design?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;SteveDenham&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2022 15:04:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/801951#M39424</guid>
      <dc:creator>SteveDenham</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-14T15:04:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Interpreting the Estimated G Matrix in Proc Mixed</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/802027#M39426</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Actually, as far as I know, there is no consensus on what to do when the G matrix is not positive definite. While some advice removing the "offending" random effects, others argue the modeling of the random effects is dictated by the design (like a RCB design), and therefore should not change the model effect specifications. If there is only one random effect with 0 estimated variance, one approach is to re-specify that random effect with the statement -- repeated / subject=&amp;lt;random_effect&amp;gt; type=cs;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If the default ddf value becomes inappropriate when a random effect is removed, then you might use ddf= option to specify your own denominator degrees of freedom value, or use other estimation method such as ddfm=kr if that helps.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Jill&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2022 18:17:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/802027#M39426</guid>
      <dc:creator>jiltao</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-14T18:17:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Interpreting the Estimated G Matrix in Proc Mixed</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/802054#M39427</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://communities.sas.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/60873"&gt;@jiltao&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://communities.sas.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/15363"&gt;@SteveDenham&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;Thank you for the insights, I am following. However, based on the posted G and R matrices, I have further questions:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;1. How do I calculate the percentage contribution of each estimated variance component?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;2. How do we get the overall error variance when heterogeneous error variance for each subject is displayed?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2022 20:26:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/802054#M39427</guid>
      <dc:creator>Lyson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-14T20:26:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Interpreting the Estimated G Matrix in Proc Mixed</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/802060#M39428</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;What you are asking for might not be applicable for a complex covariance model like yours.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Jill&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2022 21:00:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/802060#M39428</guid>
      <dc:creator>jiltao</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-14T21:00:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Interpreting the Estimated G Matrix in Proc Mixed</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/805724#M39627</link>
      <description>Hi Colleagues. I got a question from someone who saw my SAS Proc Mixed code that I used to fit a linear mixed model in SAS Studio (SAS on Demand). They asked me: "In what software environment is the procedure implemented?" I am confused with this environment term. How do I answer that one?</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 03 Apr 2022 15:55:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Interpreting-the-Estimated-G-Matrix-in-Proc-Mixed/m-p/805724#M39627</guid>
      <dc:creator>Lyson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-04-03T15:55:05Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

