Dear all, A few questions come to me when I used LME Matlab toolbox. Then Jorge kindly answered my questions and he also asked me to post our discussion to Freesurfer list so everyone knows what's going on here :)
Cheers, Ting ------------------------------------------------------------------- *Subject: *Re: Re: issue about LME Matlab tools *Sent: *Tue, Dec 11, 2012 21:41:26 Hi Ting Please could you post this question to the Freesurfer list, so other people can benefit from this discussion? I'll answer you ASAP. Best -Jorge ------------------------------------------------------ *Subject: *Re: Re: issue about LME Matlab tools *Sent: *Wed, Dec 12, 2012 6:44:36 AM Hi Jorge, Thank you for your explanation in more details. I followed your suggestion, set the convergence epsilon to 10^-5. It truly improved. I am now running the whole brain data, estimations in several voxels were not converge after 50 iterations. Given that iterations takes more computational time, how many iterations do you recommend and what do you usually do if it still not converge? Thank you again:) Warmly regards, Ting ------------------------------------------------------ *Subject:* Re: issue about LME Matlab tools *Sent: *Wed, Dec 12, 2012 00:50:35 Hi Ting You needed more iterations to make the algorithm stop closer to the optimal values. Try: statsFS= lme_fit_FS(X,[1 2],Y,ni,10^-5); or the EM algorithm statsEM = lme_fit_EM(X,[1 2],Y,ni,10^-10); Neither of these algorithms can be guaranty to converge but I have found the FS algorithm to be the most robust and fast. For the mass-univariate setting we limited the number of iterations for the FS algorithm to only 20 due to computational time. Note that for only two repeated measures (as in your data) compound symmetry (a model with a single random effect for the intercept term) likely holds for the covariance matrix among the repeated measures. Although a likelihood ratio test here comparing the model with one random effects against the model with two random effects is barely significant it will not likely survive a multiple comparisons correction. You can not impose structure on D in our toolbox nor it is recommended for general longitudinal data. Let me know any doubt you might have. Best -Jorge ------------------------------------------------------ *Subject: *issue about LME Matlab tools *Sent: *Tue, Dec 11, 2012 14:47:14 Dear Dr. Sabuncu Your recent work "Statistical Analysis of Longitudinal Neuroimage Date with Linear Mixed Effects Models" provided us a great matlab toolbox to apply Mixed Model, especially for imaging data. Now, I am investigating the intraclass correlation based on this toolbox. Sometime I found the function "lme_fit_FS" could not get the accurate estimations. I think the problem may be relevant to the initial value from OLS method, in the case that the within-subject variability estimated from "lme_fit_init" is very close to zero. I attached an example. Y is test-retest imaging data for one voxel, X is design matrix including intercept, head_motion, age, gender. I set random effect for intercept and head_motion. I also attached result from SAS and the model is ok. stats = lme_fit_FS(X,[1,2],Y,ni); Here I'm wondering is there any way to fixed this in matlab? PS, though you have mentioned that no imposed structure on D (covariance matrix of random effect), I am curious if it is possible to define the structure of D in this toolbox. Thanks for your kind attention and look forward to your reply soon. Regards, Ting
_______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly dispose of the e-mail.
