[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

From |
KONSTANTARAS KONSTANTINOS <dinokon@otenet.gr> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
RE: Re: st: GLLAMM multinomial: tremendous instability |

Date |
Thu, 4 Dec 2008 18:21:19 +0200 (EET) |

Thanks a lot for your advice.

The other random effect does not have this problem and is significant from an LR test standpoint.

Thanking you in advance, Dino K. ................................................................

Alternatively, you could have a random effect term that really "wants"to

Start deleting random effects and see if it goes away. An alternative (and maybe better) strategy would be to start from a model you know is identified, e.g., the multinomial choice model with no random effects, and add RE terms in an order determined by theory. -----Original Message----- From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu

* * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Re: Video from multiple graph exports** - Next by Date:
**RE: st: Re: RE: SBIR grants at Stata?** - Previous by thread:
**RE: Re: st: GLLAMM multinomial: tremendous instability** - Next by thread:
**RE: Re: st: GLLAMM multinomial: tremendous instability** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2017 StataCorp LLC | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |