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 |
Lena Lindbjerg Sperling <lenalindbjergsperling@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Fwd: st: Convergence never achieved with MI impute chained |

Date |
Thu, 21 Jun 2012 13:46:06 +0200 |

> > Thank you for your answer! > > It does seem though that all occupations are represented in both private and public sectors. > And I also have another data set where I only impute educational level, industry (ISIC 3 category) and wage and I still get not convergence, even though that's just one mlogit, one ologit and one pmm...so that doesn't seem to be the problem. > > I got a result out for the mi xeq 0: mlogit for industry however and it looks like this: > -> mlogit industry Iteration 0:00 log likelihood = -4875.9554 Iteration 1:00 log likelihood = -4875.9554 Multinomial logistic regression Number of obs = LR chi2(0) = 0 Prob > chi2 = . Log likelihood = -4875.9554 Pseudo R2 = industry Coef. Std. Err. z P>z [95% Agriculture__Hunting__etc_ (base outcome) Mining _cons -4.982464 0.2896632 -17.2 0 -5.550194 -4.414735 Manufacturing _cons -2.671581 0.0939994 -28.42 0 -2.855816 -2.487345 Public_services _cons -3.42432 0.134593 -25.44 0 -3.688117 -3.160522 Construction _cons -3.204691 0.1210617 -26.47 0 -3.441968 -2.967415 Retail__Hotels _cons -1.714798 0.0612048 -28.02 0 -1.834758 -1.594839 Transport_and_telecomnunications _cons -4.759321 0.2593031 -18.35 0 -5.267546 -4.251096 Finance_and_business_serv_ _cons -6.368759 0.5778449 -11.02 0 -7.501314 -5.236204 Communal_services _cons -0.830113 0.0433825 -19.13 0 -0.9151412 -0.7450848 Others_not_well_specified _cons -1.753638 0.0622235 -28.18 0 -1.875594 -1.631683 > > Should I use something else to impute this? It runs from 1 to 10 so maybe ordered is better? I get convergence if I use ordered logit for industry and occupation. They really shouldn't be ordered, but how important is that choice? > > > I can get results out if I use mvn, but is that a very bad idea? Seems like the literature disagrees quite a bit on how severe it is to assume normality? > > Best, > Lena > > Den Jun 21, 2012 kl. 10:48 AM skrev Maarten Buis: > >> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Lena Lindbjerg Sperling wrote: >>> I just looked at the mail again, and the data is not as bad as it looks, as I'm only imputing on the employed population (lstatus==1) and when we only look at them mi describe shows: >>> mi describe >>> >>> Style: wide >>> last mi update 21jun2012 10:03:51, 18 seconds ago >>> >>> Obs.: complete 2,702 >>> incomplete 912 (M = 0 imputations) >>> --------------------- >>> total 3,614 >>> >>> Vars.: imputed: 7; occup(126) ocusec(144) whours(167) edulevel(171) ocu(228) industry(204) mwage(598) >> >> Just looking at the variable names I suspect that this is an extremely >> hard model to estimate. How many categories do the variables occup, >> ocusec, ocu, and industry have? Are there combinations of three or >> less of these that for some observations perfectly predict one or more >> remaining variables? For example, if we know that someone is a mayor >> than we also know that (s)he is working in the public sector. >> >> <snip> >>> Iteration 14: log pseudolikelihood = -2454486.7 (not concave) >>> Not completely sure what this means. Can you see where things are wrong from this? >> >> It means that this sub-model did not converge, probably because of the >> problems indicated above. >> >>> When I use -mi xeq 0: mlogit - the result is: >>> m=0 data: >>> -> mlogit >>> last estimates not found >>> r(301); >>> >>> But I thought it was the observed data...which should be there? >> >> What you asked for was for Stata to replay the last -mlogit- command, >> and it replied that the last command wasn't -mlogit-. You probably >> pressed break before the model finished estimating, which makes sense >> if it did not converge. >> >> Hope this helps, >> Maarten >> >> -------------------------- >> Maarten L. Buis >> Institut fuer Soziologie >> Universitaet Tuebingen >> Wilhelmstrasse 36 >> 72074 Tuebingen >> Germany >> >> >> http://www.maartenbuis.nl >> -------------------------- >> >> * >> * 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/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: Convergence never achieved with MI impute chained***From:*Maarten Buis <maartenlbuis@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Convergence never achieved with MI impute chained***From:*Maarten Buis <maartenlbuis@gmail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Generating indices over nominal data?** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: Convergence never achieved with MI impute chained** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Convergence never achieved with MI impute chained** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: Convergence never achieved with MI impute chained** - Index(es):