Hi all
I was wondering how/if it was possible to specify the Y-intercept in Proc GLM?
I have been looking everywhere for a solution.
I need to set the intercept at 100.
I have a very simple model:
PROC GLM data; Class line; Model BW1= Log_CFU_Total*LINE / solution; run;
Any ideas/tips would be very much appreciated as I am totally stuck!
Thanks!
i
If you run the GLM model I suggested, get the slopes out and plug them into an equation that looks like %BW = 100 - log_cfu_total * slope estimate for LINE (based on the NOINT model) what do you get? All of these lines should converge on 100. They might not look like the best fit to the data, so plotting the residuals of the constructed equation would be very informative.
Since there is a log transform of the independent variable made me think of PROC NLIN as a valid alternative. Again you would need to code the LINE variable (0,1 type coding), but then a model statement that looked like:
model BW1=100 - (beta_1*Log_CFU_Total*LINE_1 + beta_2*Log_CFU_Total*LINE_2 + ... + beta_N*Log_CFU*LINE_N);
should give you what you need (I hope). You could get this back on the original (non-log transformed scale) if you wanted, but I would really worry about heterogeneous variances then. In any case, NLIN doesn't require a non-linear function, and it is a good place to fit "unusual" looking equations.
Steve Denham
What would happen if you subtract 100 from every value of BW_slaughter to get the variable BW_slaughter_minus_100 and fit:
PROC GLM data; Class line; Model BW_slaughter_minus_100 = Log_CFU_Total*LINE / solution noint; run;
This is untested, but it's about the only way I see to stay in PROC GLM.
If you can code up LINE as a set of dummy variables, then PROC REG has a RESTRICT statement, where you can set intercept=100. I get comparable results from both methods, but you should check to see which best fits your needs.
Steve Denham
Hi Steve
Thanks for your prompt response!
I have tried both methods, which sadly do not work with my data.
To explain, my BW variable is %Body weight. So, this must start at 100%, and decrease as CFU increases.
Despite trying these methods, the lines still do not cross the Y-axis at the same point.
Is there anything else you could recommend?
Thanks again!
If you run the GLM model I suggested, get the slopes out and plug them into an equation that looks like %BW = 100 - log_cfu_total * slope estimate for LINE (based on the NOINT model) what do you get? All of these lines should converge on 100. They might not look like the best fit to the data, so plotting the residuals of the constructed equation would be very informative.
Since there is a log transform of the independent variable made me think of PROC NLIN as a valid alternative. Again you would need to code the LINE variable (0,1 type coding), but then a model statement that looked like:
model BW1=100 - (beta_1*Log_CFU_Total*LINE_1 + beta_2*Log_CFU_Total*LINE_2 + ... + beta_N*Log_CFU*LINE_N);
should give you what you need (I hope). You could get this back on the original (non-log transformed scale) if you wanted, but I would really worry about heterogeneous variances then. In any case, NLIN doesn't require a non-linear function, and it is a good place to fit "unusual" looking equations.
Steve Denham
Got it!! After a little bit of axes altering!
Thank you very much for your advice!
Graham
If you have a known fixed value for the intercept, you can subtract that number from every Y value, and then fit a model with the NOINT option.
Steve Denhm
Also, appending a question to a thread that has been marked "Answered" will often result in people by-passing your question.
Steve Denham
Join us for SAS Innovate 2025, our biggest and most exciting global event of the year, in Orlando, FL, from May 6-9. Sign up by March 14 for just $795.
Learn the difference between classical and Bayesian statistical approaches and see a few PROC examples to perform Bayesian analysis in this video.
Find more tutorials on the SAS Users YouTube channel.
Ready to level-up your skills? Choose your own adventure.