Notice: On March 31, it was **announced** that Statalist is moving from an email list to a **forum**. The old list will shut down on April 23, and its replacement, **statalist.org** is already up and running.

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

From |
Jessica Bishop-Royse <jessibishoproyse@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: is gllamm appropriate? is it necessary?-more information |

Date |
Wed, 17 Mar 2010 10:56:28 -0400 |

you're right. i am actually using counties in Florida which are 67. Sorry for the confusion. On 3/17/10, Nick Cox <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk> wrote: > For extra context I guess wildly at what is not explicit here. Jessica > is using the counties of the US, which are about 3000 in number. > > Please remember that this is an international list and that others may > not share your presumptions. > > Nick > n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk > > Jessica Bishop-Royse > > Some more information about the project I am working on: > > 1. I have two main research questions here. One: What county-level > variables are associated with cause-specific death in 1980? In 2000? > And Two: What are the net effects of individual characteristics and > county level variables? What are the changes from 1980 to 2000? > > 2. I don't see county as a control variable- but rather as a cluster > variable. In fact, I am not even really interested in county per but > rather the variables that I have for counties (like % minority, % > poverty, etc.) Eventually I would like to make interaction effects > with county (ruralpoorminority counties versus ruralpoorwhite > counties, urbanpoorwhite counties, etc.) Ideally, I would like to add > these variables to a model along with my individual level predictors. > > 3. As of now, my cause of death variable is 10 categories, 9 causes > and survival. I would like the ability to model both ways (cause 1 > versus all others and each cause versus survival). > > Yesterday at about 2 pm, I set following command up to run. It ran > all afternoon, and all night and still hadn't finished. It went > through 80 iterations, most of which had the note "not concave" before > I finally canceled it this morning. I am sure that I am doing > something wrong and it makes me nervous because I haven't even added > all the predictors yet. > > . gllamm causeofdeath black, i(countynumber) > > Iteration 0: log likelihood = -226514.74 (not concave) > Iteration 1: log likelihood = -170460.09 (not concave) > Iteration 2: log likelihood = -156165.69 > Iteration 3: log likelihood = -155236.77 (not concave) > Iteration 4: log likelihood = -154882.46 > Iteration 5: log likelihood = -154869.14 > Iteration 6: log likelihood = -154848.88 (not concave) > Iteration 7: log likelihood = -154814.85 > Iteration 8: log likelihood = -154814.29 > Iteration 9: log likelihood = -154814.23 > Iteration 10: log likelihood = -154814.23 > > number of level 1 units = 318493 > number of level 2 units = 77 > > Condition Number = 2.4744641 > > gllamm model > > log likelihood = -154814.23 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------ > causeofdeath | Coef. Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. > Interval] > -------------+---------------------------------------------------------- > ------ > black | .024678 .0016439 15.01 0.000 .0214559 > .0279 > _cons | .024141 .001246 19.37 0.000 .0216988 > .0265831 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------ > > Variance at level 1 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------ > > .1547741 (.00038787) > > Variances and covariances of random effects > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------ > > > ***level 2 (countynumber) > > var(1): .00002072 (8.730e-06) > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------ > > > > . gllamm causeofdeath black biryear, i(countynumber) > > Iteration 0: log likelihood = -226590.33 (not concave) > Iteration 1: log likelihood = -170468.78 (not concave) > Iteration 2: log likelihood = -154843.19 (not concave) > Iteration 3: log likelihood = -154785.59 (not concave) > Iteration 4: log likelihood = -154772.62 (not concave) > Iteration 5: log likelihood = -154753.11 > Iteration 6: log likelihood = -154738.19 > Iteration 7: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 8: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 9: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 10: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 11: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 12: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 13: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 14: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 15: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 16: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 17: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 18: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 19: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 20: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 21: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 22: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 23: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 24: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 25: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 26: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 27: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 28: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 29: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 30: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 31: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 32: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 33: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 34: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 35: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 36: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 37: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 38: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 39: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 40: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 41: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 42: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 43: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 44: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 45: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 46: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 47: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 48: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 49: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 50: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 51: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 52: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 53: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 54: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 55: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 56: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 57: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 58: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 59: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 60: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 61: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 62: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 63: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 64: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 65: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 66: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 67: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 68: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 69: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 70: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 71: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 72: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 73: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 74: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 75: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 76: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 77: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 78: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 79: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > Iteration 80: log likelihood = -154738.07 (not concave) > (Maximization aborted) > > . > end of do-file > > . > What do you think? > > * > * 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/ > -- Jessi Bishop-Royse http://sites.google.com/site/wakullagirlssoccer/ http://sites.google.com/site/jessicacbishoproyse/Home "Without a struggle, there can be no progress." Fredrick Douglass * * 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/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: is gllamm appropriate? is it necessary?-more information***From:*Partha Deb <partha.deb@hunter.cuny.edu>

**References**:**Re: st: is gllamm appropriate? is it necessary?-more information***From:*Jessica Bishop-Royse <jessibishoproyse@gmail.com>

**RE: st: is gllamm appropriate? is it necessary?-more information***From:*"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

- Prev by Date:
**RE: st: is gllamm appropriate? is it necessary?-more information** - Next by Date:
**RE: st: tab most frequently occurring** - Previous by thread:
**RE: st: is gllamm appropriate? is it necessary?-more information** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: is gllamm appropriate? is it necessary?-more information** - Index(es):