<?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: Method laplace vs RSPL in GLIMMIX in Statistical Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Method-laplace-vs-RSPL-in-GLIMMIX/m-p/137901#M7164</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes, the results will often differ substantially between the pseudo-likelihood methods and the quasi-likelihood methods.&amp;nbsp; Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a good way to compare competing models under the pseudo-likelihood methods, as the pseudo-data will not be constant.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So, model the repeated nature as a G side parameterization using method=laplace, and trust in those results, as they have been shown to be relatively less biased than the marginal estimates using an R side parameterization.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Steve Denham&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2014 15:24:28 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SteveDenham</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2014-07-28T15:24:28Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Method laplace vs RSPL in GLIMMIX</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Method-laplace-vs-RSPL-in-GLIMMIX/m-p/137900#M7163</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi, &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm running glimmix for a group of categorical variables. I wanted to evaluate models using Akaike, therefore I put laplace as the METHOD, which allow be to obtain AIC values.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;seBUT, my question is:&amp;nbsp; Am I doing something wrong? Because results are very different if using the default method RSPL or the laplace, so I'm afraid I might me skipping something important.... &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I red that the laplace method wont let you model the R-effect, but I'm not sure if I understand what it means...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So.. please.... Help!!!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2014 19:58:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Method-laplace-vs-RSPL-in-GLIMMIX/m-p/137900#M7163</guid>
      <dc:creator>FranAstorga</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-07-25T19:58:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Method laplace vs RSPL in GLIMMIX</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Method-laplace-vs-RSPL-in-GLIMMIX/m-p/137901#M7164</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes, the results will often differ substantially between the pseudo-likelihood methods and the quasi-likelihood methods.&amp;nbsp; Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a good way to compare competing models under the pseudo-likelihood methods, as the pseudo-data will not be constant.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So, model the repeated nature as a G side parameterization using method=laplace, and trust in those results, as they have been shown to be relatively less biased than the marginal estimates using an R side parameterization.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Steve Denham&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2014 15:24:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Method-laplace-vs-RSPL-in-GLIMMIX/m-p/137901#M7164</guid>
      <dc:creator>SteveDenham</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-07-28T15:24:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Method laplace vs RSPL in GLIMMIX</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Method-laplace-vs-RSPL-in-GLIMMIX/m-p/137902#M7165</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks, Steve&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But I'm still worried. In the SAS documentation it says that:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;'&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; font-family: arial, 'Arial Unicode MS', geneva, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif; background-color: #ffffff;"&gt;R-side effects in the &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;A href="http://support.sas.com/documentation/cdl/en/statug/63033/HTML/default/statug_glimmix_sect009.htm" style="font-family: arial, 'Arial Unicode MS', geneva, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif; color: #000066; background-color: #ffffff;"&gt;RANDOM &lt;/A&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; font-family: arial, 'Arial Unicode MS', geneva, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif; background-color: #ffffff;"&gt;statement do not generate model matrices;&lt;SPAN style="text-decoration: underline;"&gt; they serve only to index observations within subjects"&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; font-family: arial, 'Arial Unicode MS', geneva, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif; background-color: #ffffff;"&gt;The problem is my data. I'm using more that one observation per individual, therefore I'm using GLIMMIX to consider each individual as a "cluster" item. I'm studing dogs within a comunity, and each person has one or more dogs, therefore I'm using the "owner" as an item that should be considered by the procedure. If I understood correctly what SAS said, I would need R-side effects, because they would be serving me to index observations within subjects.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Am I understanding it correctly?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What do you think?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Could I still use laplace for my data?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2014 18:50:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Method-laplace-vs-RSPL-in-GLIMMIX/m-p/137902#M7165</guid>
      <dc:creator>FranAstorga</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-07-28T18:50:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Method laplace vs RSPL in GLIMMIX</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Method-laplace-vs-RSPL-in-GLIMMIX/m-p/137903#M7166</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;In this case, R-side would index each dog within an owner, as if the owner were measured on successive time points or at geographically defined points.&amp;nbsp; G-side would add columns to the &lt;STRONG&gt;Z &lt;/STRONG&gt;matrix so that each owner is viewed as a cluster of dogs, and a variance component (or components) is estimated.&amp;nbsp; For what you are doing, I don't see any need for R side approach.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Now a key here is the distribution associated with the response variable.&amp;nbsp; Be sure that the link associated is appropriate--cumulative logit for ordinal categories and generalized logit for nominal categories.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Steve Denham&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2014 19:19:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Method-laplace-vs-RSPL-in-GLIMMIX/m-p/137903#M7166</guid>
      <dc:creator>SteveDenham</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-07-28T19:19:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

