0
$\begingroup$

I'm working with a response variable with values between 0.0 and 1.0. I have a lot of zero. Thus, I'm using beta zero-inflated regression model. Specifically, I'm using the function gamlss from the gamlss package, with family = BEZI, to test the effect of a factor (three levels) on the response variable. With the wp function, I get the worm plot to evaluate the adjustment (following this document: http://www.gamlss.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/gamlss-manual.pdf). However, the adjustment is not good, and it is better when I use family = BEINF (which consideres 1 values. But, my data do not show 1s).

The AIC is lower and global deviance is higher when BEZI is used, but the fit (follow worm plot) is better when I consider BEINF.

Do you know what can I do to choose the best model or how to improve the fit? I appreciate any help you can bring me!

RESULT FOR BEZI

m1<-gamlss(resposta ~fase, data = ciliados, family = BEZI(),trace = F);summary(m1)


Family: c("BEZI", "Zero Inflated Beta")

Call: gamlss(formula = resposta ~ fase, family = BEZI(), data = ciliados, trace = F)

Fitting method: RS()


Mu link function: logit Mu Coefficients: Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) (Intercept) -3.3939 0.1812 -18.735 7.85e-16 *** faseBefore 0.5548 0.2065 2.686 0.0129 * faseFill 0.4391 0.2091 2.100 0.0464 *

Signif. codes: 0 ‘’ 0.001 ‘’ 0.01 ‘’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1


Sigma link function: log Sigma Coefficients: Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) (Intercept) 6.8640 0.6332 10.84 9.93e-11 ***

Signif. codes: 0 ‘’ 0.001 ‘’ 0.01 ‘’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1


Nu link function: logit Nu Coefficients: Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) (Intercept) 1.5686 0.4916 3.191 0.00393 **

Signif. codes: 0 ‘’ 0.001 ‘’ 0.01 ‘’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1


No. of observations in the fit: 29 Degrees of Freedom for the fit: 5 Residual Deg. of Freedom: 24 at cycle: 8

Global Deviance: -9.016796 AIC: 0.9832042 SBC: 7.819683


enter image description here

RESULT FOR BEINF

m1<-gamlss(resposta ~fase, data = ciliados, family = BEINF(),trace = F);summary(m1)


Family: c("BEINF", "Beta Inflated")

Call: gamlss(formula = resposta ~ fase, family = BEINF(), data = ciliados, trace = F)

Fitting method: RS()


Mu link function: logit Mu Coefficients: Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) (Intercept) -3.3938 0.1812 -18.735 2e-15 *** faseBefore 0.5548 0.2065 2.686 0.0132 * faseFill 0.4391 0.2091 2.100 0.0469 *

Signif. codes: 0 ‘’ 0.001 ‘’ 0.01 ‘’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1


Sigma link function: logit Sigma Coefficients: Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) (Intercept) -3.3997 0.3268 -10.4 3.61e-10 ***

Signif. codes: 0 ‘’ 0.001 ‘’ 0.01 ‘’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1


Nu link function: log Nu Coefficients: Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) (Intercept) 1.5686 0.4916 3.191 0.00407 **

Signif. codes: 0 ‘’ 0.001 ‘’ 0.01 ‘’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1


Tau link function: log Tau Coefficients: Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) (Intercept) -15.27 924.26 -0.017 0.987


No. of observations in the fit: 29 Degrees of Freedom for the fit: 6 Residual Deg. of Freedom: 23 at cycle: 6

Global Deviance: -9.016793 AIC: 2.983207 SBC: 11.18698


enter image description here

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

0
$\begingroup$

For a zero inflated beta you can use BEINF0 in gamlss, [which is a submodel of BEINF].

The reason for your different residual plots, may be that BEZI and BEINF0 use slightly different parameterisations.

In your BEINF fit you will find that the fitted probability that Y=1 is effectively zero, so best to use BEINF0.

Note also that you are only modelling mu in BEINF. In BEINF0(mu,sigma,mu) you could try including models for mu, sigma and nu.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ THX, Robert. I Used BEINF0 and it improved the fit! $\endgroup$ Jan 26 at 13:55

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.