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

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2019-12-21 16:02 (1612 d 12:28 ago) – Posting: # 21012
Views: 5,757

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
23,033 posts in 4,835 threads, 1,647 registered users;
38 visitors (0 registered, 38 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time: 05:30 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Give me a fruitful error any time, full of seeds, bursting with its own corrections.
You can keep your sterile truth for yourself.    Vilfredo Pareto

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