Thanks!
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Joshua Wiley wrote:
> Yep that's exactly right! :)
>
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 6:22 PM, Antonio P. Ramos
> wrote:
> > Just to clarify: I should include wealth - the categorical variable - as
> a
> > fixed effects *and* within the smooth using the argumen
Yep that's exactly right! :)
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 6:22 PM, Antonio P. Ramos
wrote:
> Just to clarify: I should include wealth - the categorical variable - as a
> fixed effects *and* within the smooth using the argument "by". It that
> correct? thanks a bunch
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 6:18
Just to clarify: I should include wealth - the categorical variable - as a
fixed effects *and* within the smooth using the argument "by". It that
correct? thanks a bunch
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Joshua Wiley wrote:
> Hi Antonio,
>
> If wealth is a factor variable, you should include the
Hi Antonio,
If wealth is a factor variable, you should include the main effect in
the model, as the smooths will be centered.
Cheers,
Josh
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Antonio P. Ramos
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am not sure how to handle interactions with categorical predictors in the
> GAM
Just to clarify: gam.1 has wealth inside the smooths and as a fixed effect
predictor while gam.2 only have wealth inside the smooths. Thanks
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Antonio P. Ramos <
ramos.grad.stud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am not sure how to handle interactions with catego
Hi all,
I am not sure how to handle interactions with categorical predictors in the
GAM models. For example what is the different between these bellow two
models. Tests are indicating that they are different but their predictions
are essentially the same.
Thanks a bunch,
> gam.1 <- gam(mortality
6 matches
Mail list logo
