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]
Re: st: Separate intercept mixed model
From
[email protected] (Roberto G. Gutierrez, StataCorp)
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: Separate intercept mixed model
Date
Tue, 08 Feb 2011 13:05:06 -0600
Michael Mitchell <[email protected]> asks:
> I am trying to estimate a mixed (multilevel) model using a separate
> intercept approach, and am getting an error saying that the likelihood
> evaluates to missing. Here is the model I am estimating with the error...
> . webuse pig, clear
> (Longitudinal analysis of pig weights)
> . replace week = week - 1
> (432 real changes made)
> . * create 2 groups, trt and control
> . generate trt = (id > 24)
> . * make weight 10 pounds more for treatment
> . replace weight = weight + 10 if trt == 1
> (216 real changes made)
> . * Model 0:
> . * Enter trt as factor variable
> . xtmixed weight ibn.trt c.week , nocons || id:
> Performing EM optimization:
> likelihood evaluates to missing
> r(430);
Michael then explains that this should work because he generates the
indicators manually and then runs -xtmixed- with these instead. He is
right.
Michael has discovered a bug in how -xtmixed- is mishandling the "ibn."
factor notation for including all levels of a factor variable, including
the base category.
This will be fixed in the next ado update.
--Bobby
[email protected]
*
* 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/