Slightly off topic, but related :-) [Design Issues]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2019-12-21 15:02 (887 d 23:28 ago) – Posting: # 21012
Views: 4,799

Hi PharmCat,

» For observation 8 we have -3.608225e-16, I think,

This. I think, is around the "effective zero" for fits in R at default settings on 64- and 32-bit systems.

» I don't know how to say with сlever words.

Very unfortunate, because I did not understand what was being said. I would like to get the insight. It is at the limits of my conception.

» ML and REML variation estimates all biased, but less biased than lm with missing data.

Is this a fact? How do we actually know this? Do you have a reference I coud learn from (not Pinheiro and Bates, I don't understand a word of it).
Does "less biased" apply to both the fixed effects and to the variance components?

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,108 posts in 4,630 threads, 1,567 registered users;
online 10 (2 registered, 8 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time: Friday 15:30 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

We absolutely must leave room for doubt
or there is no progress and no learning.
There is no learning without having to pose a question.
And a question requires doubt.
People search for certainty.
But there is no certainty.    Richard Feynman

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5