Open Science Research Excellence

Open Science Index

Commenced in January 2007 Frequency: Monthly Edition: International Paper Count: 2

2
10010201
Comparison of Methods of Estimation for Use in Goodness of Fit Tests for Binary Multilevel Models
Abstract:

It can be frequently observed that the data arising in our environment have a hierarchical or a nested structure attached with the data. Multilevel modelling is a modern approach to handle this kind of data. When multilevel modelling is combined with a binary response, the estimation methods get complex in nature and the usual techniques are derived from quasi-likelihood method. The estimation methods which are compared in this study are, marginal quasi-likelihood (order 1 & order 2) (MQL1, MQL2) and penalized quasi-likelihood (order 1 & order 2) (PQL1, PQL2). A statistical model is of no use if it does not reflect the given dataset. Therefore, checking the adequacy of the fitted model through a goodness-of-fit (GOF) test is an essential stage in any modelling procedure. However, prior to usage, it is also equally important to confirm that the GOF test performs well and is suitable for the given model. This study assesses the suitability of the GOF test developed for binary response multilevel models with respect to the method used in model estimation. An extensive set of simulations was conducted using MLwiN (v 2.19) with varying number of clusters, cluster sizes and intra cluster correlations. The test maintained the desirable Type-I error for models estimated using PQL2 and it failed for almost all the combinations of MQL. Power of the test was adequate for most of the combinations in all estimation methods except MQL1. Moreover, models were fitted using the four methods to a real-life dataset and performance of the test was compared for each model.

1
6955
A Comparison of Marginal and Joint Generalized Quasi-likelihood Estimating Equations Based On the Com-Poisson GLM: Application to Car Breakdowns Data
Abstract:

In this paper, we apply and compare two generalized estimating equation approaches to the analysis of car breakdowns data in Mauritius. Number of breakdowns experienced by a machinery is a highly under-dispersed count random variable and its value can be attributed to the factors related to the mechanical input and output of that machinery. Analyzing such under-dispersed count observation as a function of the explanatory factors has been a challenging problem. In this paper, we aim at estimating the effects of various factors on the number of breakdowns experienced by a passenger car based on a study performed in Mauritius over a year. We remark that the number of passenger car breakdowns is highly under-dispersed. These data are therefore modelled and analyzed using Com-Poisson regression model. We use the two types of quasi-likelihood estimation approaches to estimate the parameters of the model: marginal and joint generalized quasi-likelihood estimating equation approaches. Under-dispersion parameter is estimated to be around 2.14 justifying the appropriateness of Com-Poisson distribution in modelling underdispersed count responses recorded in this study.


Vol:13 No:12 2019Vol:13 No:11 2019Vol:13 No:10 2019Vol:13 No:09 2019Vol:13 No:08 2019Vol:13 No:07 2019Vol:13 No:06 2019Vol:13 No:05 2019Vol:13 No:04 2019Vol:13 No:03 2019Vol:13 No:02 2019Vol:13 No:01 2019
Vol:12 No:12 2018Vol:12 No:11 2018Vol:12 No:10 2018Vol:12 No:09 2018Vol:12 No:08 2018Vol:12 No:07 2018Vol:12 No:06 2018Vol:12 No:05 2018Vol:12 No:04 2018Vol:12 No:03 2018Vol:12 No:02 2018Vol:12 No:01 2018
Vol:11 No:12 2017Vol:11 No:11 2017Vol:11 No:10 2017Vol:11 No:09 2017Vol:11 No:08 2017Vol:11 No:07 2017Vol:11 No:06 2017Vol:11 No:05 2017Vol:11 No:04 2017Vol:11 No:03 2017Vol:11 No:02 2017Vol:11 No:01 2017
Vol:10 No:12 2016Vol:10 No:11 2016Vol:10 No:10 2016Vol:10 No:09 2016Vol:10 No:08 2016Vol:10 No:07 2016Vol:10 No:06 2016Vol:10 No:05 2016Vol:10 No:04 2016Vol:10 No:03 2016Vol:10 No:02 2016Vol:10 No:01 2016
Vol:9 No:12 2015Vol:9 No:11 2015Vol:9 No:10 2015Vol:9 No:09 2015Vol:9 No:08 2015Vol:9 No:07 2015Vol:9 No:06 2015Vol:9 No:05 2015Vol:9 No:04 2015Vol:9 No:03 2015Vol:9 No:02 2015Vol:9 No:01 2015
Vol:8 No:12 2014Vol:8 No:11 2014Vol:8 No:10 2014Vol:8 No:09 2014Vol:8 No:08 2014Vol:8 No:07 2014Vol:8 No:06 2014Vol:8 No:05 2014Vol:8 No:04 2014Vol:8 No:03 2014Vol:8 No:02 2014Vol:8 No:01 2014
Vol:7 No:12 2013Vol:7 No:11 2013Vol:7 No:10 2013Vol:7 No:09 2013Vol:7 No:08 2013Vol:7 No:07 2013Vol:7 No:06 2013Vol:7 No:05 2013Vol:7 No:04 2013Vol:7 No:03 2013Vol:7 No:02 2013Vol:7 No:01 2013
Vol:6 No:12 2012Vol:6 No:11 2012Vol:6 No:10 2012Vol:6 No:09 2012Vol:6 No:08 2012Vol:6 No:07 2012Vol:6 No:06 2012Vol:6 No:05 2012Vol:6 No:04 2012Vol:6 No:03 2012Vol:6 No:02 2012Vol:6 No:01 2012
Vol:5 No:12 2011Vol:5 No:11 2011Vol:5 No:10 2011Vol:5 No:09 2011Vol:5 No:08 2011Vol:5 No:07 2011Vol:5 No:06 2011Vol:5 No:05 2011Vol:5 No:04 2011Vol:5 No:03 2011Vol:5 No:02 2011Vol:5 No:01 2011
Vol:4 No:12 2010Vol:4 No:11 2010Vol:4 No:10 2010Vol:4 No:09 2010Vol:4 No:08 2010Vol:4 No:07 2010Vol:4 No:06 2010Vol:4 No:05 2010Vol:4 No:04 2010Vol:4 No:03 2010Vol:4 No:02 2010Vol:4 No:01 2010
Vol:3 No:12 2009Vol:3 No:11 2009Vol:3 No:10 2009Vol:3 No:09 2009Vol:3 No:08 2009Vol:3 No:07 2009Vol:3 No:06 2009Vol:3 No:05 2009Vol:3 No:04 2009Vol:3 No:03 2009Vol:3 No:02 2009Vol:3 No:01 2009
Vol:2 No:12 2008Vol:2 No:11 2008Vol:2 No:10 2008Vol:2 No:09 2008Vol:2 No:08 2008Vol:2 No:07 2008Vol:2 No:06 2008Vol:2 No:05 2008Vol:2 No:04 2008Vol:2 No:03 2008Vol:2 No:02 2008Vol:2 No:01 2008
Vol:1 No:12 2007Vol:1 No:11 2007Vol:1 No:10 2007Vol:1 No:09 2007Vol:1 No:08 2007Vol:1 No:07 2007Vol:1 No:06 2007Vol:1 No:05 2007Vol:1 No:04 2007Vol:1 No:03 2007Vol:1 No:02 2007Vol:1 No:01 2007