Graduate Difference between LMEs and GLMMs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter FallenApple
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Difference
Click For Summary
Linear mixed models (LMEs) incorporate both fixed and random coefficients, allowing for better estimation of cross-sectional effects through random slopes and intercepts. Generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) are considered broader, as they include models with random and fixed effects but can also accommodate non-linear link functions. The discussion highlights that while LMEs can be viewed as a special case of GLMMs with an identity link function, GLMMs can exist without fixed effects, leading to potential confusion. The R package lme4's glmer function is noted for its flexibility in handling various random and mixed effects. For deeper insights into statistical modeling questions, Cross-Validated is recommended as a resource.
FallenApple
Messages
564
Reaction score
61
So I know that linear mixed models model has coefficients that are fixed and random. From what I understand, the fixed coefficients are still good since the random slopes/intercepts capture between subject heterogeneity. Which I suppose help estimate the crossectional effects better( i.e the fixed Betas)

Here is an example of LME

##Y_{i,j} \sim (\beta_{0}+b_{0,i} )+(\beta_{1}+b_{1,i})X_{i,j}+\epsilon_{i,j}##
Where ##(b_{0,i},b_{0,i})\underset{i,i,d}\sim N((0,0),G)##
##\epsilon_{i,j}\underset{i,i,d}\sim N(0,\sigma_{\epsilon})##

So I see here that the "coefficient"s consists of a random part and a fixed part

But I heard that LMEs are just special cases of Generalized Linear Mixed Effects Models(GLMMs). But isn't that a contradiction? GLMMs estimates are only for within subjects. Whereas for LMEs, I have population based estimates and within subject based ones.

Here is an example of GLMM

##link(\mu_{i,j}) \sim \beta_{0} +\beta_{1}X_{i,j}##

Where here appearantly, the betas are random.

So how can the lme be a subcase of glmm if there is no fixed component about which the individual can vary?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
My understanding was that GLMMs are like GLMs except that they contain random as well as fixed effects. If so then, strictly speaking, that last one would not be a GLMM because it contains no fixed effects. But I suspect that practical use may be that GLMMs are understood to include all models that, via a link transformation, are linear combinations of random and/or fixed effects, in which case we would include the second example as a somewhat-degenerate GLMM.

I would have thought that, in the above, the first model can be expressed as an instance of the second by mapping ##(\beta_0+b_{0,i})+\epsilon_{i,j}## and ##(\beta_1+b_{1,i})## in the first model to ##\beta_0## and ##\beta_1## in the second.

Thus the remaining difference in structure between the two is that the second has a potentially non-linear link function, making the first a special case of the second, with identity link function.

Although I am very far from expert on this, I did a bit of modelling last year using function glmer from R package lme4, which implements GLMMs. The function is general enough that it can have all random effects, all mixed effects or a mixture of both, and can have a range of link functions including identity (giving a linear model).

If you want input from the real experts, a good place to get answers to statistical practice questions like this is Cross-Validated. This is distinct from Stack Overflow, where one asks questions about how to make specific programs like SAS, Stata or R do certain things.
 
If there are an infinite number of natural numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two natural numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and... then that must mean that there are not only infinite infinities, but an infinite number of those infinities. and an infinite number of those...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
885
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K