Hi all,
I have estimated an MMNL model with one latent variable using Apollo 0.2.9 on R 4.3.1
I have 723 respondents answering 4 menus each with four alternatives (so the Number of modelled outcomes should be 11568)
When I ran the model again using Apollo 0.3.1 on R 4.3.2, for some reason, the Number of modelled outcomes: 5061, the Model diagnosis was : Relative function convergence and obviously, the estimated parameters were different
The code files are exactly the same, the only difference is that in the old versioned file, I did not specify the "rows=(task==1)" for the LV estimation.
I could not attach the output files as this format is not accepted.
Any idea what could have led to these different estimation results (same code, same data) ?
Anat
Important: Read this before posting to this forum
- This forum is for questions related to the use of Apollo. We will answer some general choice modelling questions too, where appropriate, and time permitting. We cannot answer questions about how to estimate choice models with other software packages.
- There is a very detailed manual for Apollo available at http://www.ApolloChoiceModelling.com/manual.html. This contains detailed descriptions of the various Apollo functions, and numerous examples are available at http://www.ApolloChoiceModelling.com/examples.html. In addition, help files are available for all functions, using e.g. ?apollo_mnl
- Before asking a question on the forum, users are kindly requested to follow these steps:
- Check that the same issue has not already been addressed in the forum - there is a search tool.
- Ensure that the correct syntax has been used. For any function, detailed instructions are available directly in Apollo, e.g. by using ?apollo_mnl for apollo_mnl
- Check the frequently asked questions section on the Apollo website, which discusses some common issues/failures. Please see http://www.apollochoicemodelling.com/faq.html
- Make sure that R is using the latest official release of Apollo.
- Users can check which version they are running by entering packageVersion("apollo").
- Then check what is the latest full release (not development version) at http://www.ApolloChoiceModelling.com/code.html.
- To update to the latest official version, just enter install.packages("apollo"). To update to a development version, download the appropriate binary file from http://www.ApolloChoiceModelling.com/code.html, and install the package from file
- If the above steps do not resolve the issue, then users should follow these steps when posting a question:
- provide full details on the issue, including the entire code and output, including any error messages
- posts will not immediately appear on the forum, but will be checked by a moderator first. This may take a day or two at busy times. There is no need to submit the post multiple times.
same code same data different "Number of modelled outcome"s
same code same data different "Number of modelled outcome"s
Anat Tchetchik
Re: same code same data different "Number of modelled outcome"s
I think that understand the problem, the correct number of models is indeed 5061 = 723*7, I should have specified the "rows=(task==1)" for the LV estimation. I just don't understand how it converged in the previous version (0.2.9).
Anat Tchetchik
-
stephanehess
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1002
- Joined: 24 Apr 2020, 16:29
Re: same code same data different "Number of modelled outcome"s
Anat
modelled outcomes is the number of separate dependent variable observations. Relative function convergence is the BGW terminology for convergence.
Using rows=(task==1) is correct, and will indeed give you different estimates as you don't overstate the weight for the measurement model part
Stephane
modelled outcomes is the number of separate dependent variable observations. Relative function convergence is the BGW terminology for convergence.
Using rows=(task==1) is correct, and will indeed give you different estimates as you don't overstate the weight for the measurement model part
Stephane