Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
AW: st: AW: changes in -xi: xtmixed- command from Stata 10 to 11
From
"Martin Weiss" <[email protected]>
To
<[email protected]>
Subject
AW: st: AW: changes in -xi: xtmixed- command from Stata 10 to 11
Date
Thu, 22 Apr 2010 15:22:37 +0200
<>
Here is my log for the same code:
Refining starting values:
Iteration 0: log likelihood = -1169.4088 (not concave)
Iteration 1: log likelihood = -1156.8957 (not concave)
Iteration 2: log likelihood = -1101.7801
Performing gradient-based optimization:
Iteration 0: log likelihood = -1101.7801
Iteration 1: log likelihood = -1090.8581
Iteration 2: log likelihood = -1089.366
Iteration 3: log likelihood = -1089.3604
Iteration 4: log likelihood = -1089.3578
Iteration 5: log likelihood = -1089.3572 (not concave)
numerical derivatives are approximate
flat or discontinuous region encountered
Iteration 6: log likelihood = -1089.3568 (not concave)
numerical derivatives are approximate
flat or discontinuous region encountered
Iteration 7: log likelihood = -1089.3566 (not concave)
numerical derivatives are approximate
flat or discontinuous region encountered
Iteration 8: log likelihood = -1089.3565 (not concave)
numerical derivatives are approximate
flat or discontinuous region encountered
Iteration 9: log likelihood = -1089.3565 (not concave)
numerical derivatives are approximate
Are there any permanent settings that might differ between us, or is this
also an issue of hardware?
HTH
Martin
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Scott Merryman
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 22. April 2010 15:04
An: [email protected]
Betreff: Re: st: AW: changes in -xi: xtmixed- command from Stata 10 to 11
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Martin Weiss <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <>
>
> A similar thing happens when I run this example in Stata 10.1 MP:
>
>
> *************
> webuse melanoma, clear
> gen uv2 = uv^2
> xtmepoisson deaths uv uv2, exposure(expected) || nation: || region:
> *************
>
> versus this in Stata 11 MP:
>
> *************
> webuse melanoma, clear
> xtmepoisson deaths uv c.uv#c.uv, exposure(expected) || nation:|| region:
> *************
>
> The Stata 11 incarnation constantly reports "flat or discontinuous region
> encountered", while the 10.1 version converges after a couple of steps:
That's odd - I get convergence with Stata 11 MP.
. webuse melanoma, clear
(Skin cancer (melanoma) data)
. xtmepoisson deaths uv c.uv#c.uv, exposure(expected) || nation:|| region:
Refining starting values:
Iteration 0: log likelihood = -1169.4088 (not concave)
Iteration 1: log likelihood = -1156.8957 (not concave)
Iteration 2: log likelihood = -1101.9749
Performing gradient-based optimization:
Iteration 0: log likelihood = -1101.9749
Iteration 1: log likelihood = -1097.2043
Iteration 2: log likelihood = -1089.5644
Iteration 3: log likelihood = -1089.4115
Iteration 4: log likelihood = -1089.411
Iteration 5: log likelihood = -1089.411
Scott
*
* 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/
*
* 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/